
Copyright N°. 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSm 



WARNING OUT 

IN NEW ENGLAND 



WARNING OUT 

IN NEW ENGLAND 



BY 

JOSIAH HENRY BENTON, LL.D. 

AUTHOR OF "early CENSUS MAKING IN MASSACHUSETTS"; "sTORY OF THE OLD BOSTON 

TOWN house"; "the BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER! ITS ORIGIN AND GROWTH" 

"sAMUEL SLADE BENTON: HIS ANCESTORS AND DESCENDANTS," ETC. 



"A book in shape hit, really, pure, crude fact 
Secreted from man's life when hearts beat hard, 
And brains, high-blooded, ticked ttvo centuries since" 



1656—1817 



BOSTON 

W. B. CLARKE COMPANY 

1911 



F6- 



COPYRIGHT, 1911, BY JOSIAH HENRY BENTON 



€) 



PRESS OF GEO. H. ELLIS CO., BOSTON 



CCI.A2'J5BS2 
Up.*/ 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Chapter 1. Introduction. — Examples of Warning Out. — 

Inhabitancy. — Land Titles in New England 1-17 

Chapter 2. Admission of Inhabitants. — Grants of Land by 
Towns. — Restraint of Alienation of Lands. — Proceedings in 
Boston and Other Massachusetts and Plymouth Towns . . 18-45 

Chapter 3. Massachusetts Colony and State Laws. — 
Plymouth Colony Laws. — Further Illustrations of Town 
Action as to Inhabitancy, Alienation of Land, Warning 
Out, etc 46-62 

Chapter 4. Inhabitancy and Warning Out in Connecticut. — 
Early Colony and State Laws. — Illustrations of Action of 
Towns, etc 63-87 

Chapter 5. New Hampshire Colony and State Laws. — Action 
of Towns as to Inhabitancy, Warning Out, Relief of the 
Poor, etc 88-98 

Chapter 6. Rhode Island Colony and State Laws as to In- 
habitancy, Relief of the Poor, Town Settlement, etc. — 
Maine and Vermont State Laws as to Warning Out, Inhabi- 
tancy, Settlement, Relief of the Poor, etc 99-113 

Chapter 7. The Length of Time Warning Out was prac- 
tised.— Effect of Warning Out, How Avoided. — Value of 
Warning Out Records. — Summary as to Reasons for Warn- 
ing Out, etc 114-121 

Chronology 122 

Index 123-131 



CHAPTER I. 

Introduction. — Examples of Warning Out. — Inhabitancy. — 
Land Titles in New England. 

The information contained in this book was gath- 
ered in the preparation of a paper read before the 
New England Historic-Genealogical Society. The 
paper was not printed, because it was thought the 
subject was of sufficient general interest to warrant 
its presentation in a book for the use of the public at 
large. This volume has therefore no claim to merit 
except that it contains material which has not before 
been brought together, relating to an interesting chap- 
ter in the Colonial and early State history of New 
England. 

I have attempted to tell the story mainly in the 
language of the records and statutes of the time. I 
believe that real history is thus best written. As the 
eminent historian of New England so well said: — 

The peculiar language of the men whom the historian de- 
scribes is a substantive part of their peculiar history. It dis- 
plays the form and pressure of the place and time. The phrase- 
ology of the actors is a constant expositor and reminder of the 
complexion of the thoughts and sentiments that determined the 
course of affairs.* 

In the records of the town of Alstead, New Hampshire, 
is found this: — 

State of New Hampshire, Cheshire ss. 

To Saml. Kidder one of the Constables of Alstead, 
Greeting: 

In the name of the Government & people of said state you are 
hereby Required forthwith to warn Jacob Benton & Hannah his 
wife, Mabel, Jacob, Reynold, Mary & Samuel Benton, their chil- 
dren to Depart out of this Town Immediately & no longer make 

* Palfrey, History of Nnv England, Vol. I, p. xvi. 



2 Warning Out in New England 

it the place of their Residence under the pains that will follow. 
Hereof fail not & make Return of this warrant with your doings 
thereon as soon as may be. 

Given under our hands and seal of office this 26th March 1783. 

Amos Shepard ~\ 
TiMO Fletcher [■ Selectmen. 
April 7, 1783 Simon Brooks, Jr. 3 

Serv'*. this warrant by reading the same in the hearing of s"* 

persons 

Saml. Kidder 

Const. 

The Jacob Benton named in this notice was my great- 
grandfather, and the Samuel, who was then about five 
years old, was my grandfather. 

In the records of the town of Rockingham, Vermont, 
there is found this: — 

State of Vermont, \ To either Constable of Rockingham in 
Windham County ss j the County of Windham. Greeting. 

You are hereby required to summon Joseph Bellows and Mary 
Bellows his wife and George Bellows, Henry A. Bellows and Fanny 
A. Bellows, their children, now residing in Rockingham to depart 
s'd Town. 

Hereof fail not, but of this precept & your doings herein due 
return make according to law. 

Given under our hands at Rockingham this 30 day of May 1813. 

Jonathan Barron \ Selectmen 
Sam'l W. Pulsipher >• of 

Elias Olcott ) Rockingham 

The return upon this warrant was that it had been 
served "by putting a true and attested copy into the 
hands of the within named Joseph Bellows with this 
my return endorsed thereon." 

In 1791 this warrant was issued in Lancaster, Massa- 
chusetts : — 

You are directed to warn and give notice unto the Hon. John 
Sprague, late of Rochester, in the County of Plymouth, Esq., a 
sheriff of the County of Worcester, John Maynard, late of Fram- 



Warning Out in New England 3 

ingham, in the County of Middlesex, Esq., Edmund Heard, late 
of Worcester, in the County of Worcester, Esq., Ebenezer Torrey, 
late of Boston, in the County of Suffolk, gentleman; William 
Stedman, late of Cambridge, in the County of Middlesex, Esq., 
Merrick Rice, late of Brookfield, in the County of Worcester, gen- 
tleman, Joseph Wales, late of Braintree, in the County of Suf- 
folk, gentleman, who have lately come into this town for the 
purpose of abiding therein, not having obtained the town's con- 
sent therefor, that they respectively depart the limits thereof, 
with their children and all under their care w^ithin 15 days. 

Upon reading these records, we are naturally led to 
inquire why these persons were thus summarily notified 
to leave their homes and depart out of the towns in 
which they lived. The notices themselves give no 
reason, and there was no reason in the character of the 
persons, why they should be thus treated. My great- 
grandfather was a good soldier, a devout Christian, 
and a peaceable citizen. Joseph Bellows was a dis- 
tinguished soldier, a charming man, and an excellent 
citizen. He had moved from Walpole, New Hamp- 
shire, across the Connecticut River, to Rockingham, 
Vermont, to a new farm, and was a desirable addi- 
tion to the population of the town. Henry A. Bel- 
lows, one of the persons named among his children, 
and warned out, was Henry Adams Bellows, who be- 
came an eminent lawyer, and was for many years 
the chief justice of the State of New Hampshire. 
The persons named in the Lancaster warrant were all 
desirable and excellent citizens. Obviously, none of 
these were persons whom the citizens desired to have 
depart out of their towns. Why, therefore, were they 
thus summarily warned to depart.? What was the reason 
of this apparently extraordinary and unjust treatment 
of these persons.^ The treatment was, of course, au- 
thorized by law; but why was there such a law.? What 
was the reason for it.? 



Warnincf Out in New EnL>land 



&' 



To answer that question intelligently requires an 
examination of the principles of law and custom under- 
lying the establishment of towns in New England, 
and of the rights and obligations of their inhabitants. 
This requires us also to ascertain the law and the 
custom with regard to municipalities in England, from 
which the early New England settlers came. They 
brought with them the customs and the laws of their 
forbears in England as a part of themselves, and they 
necessarily developed the government of their towns 
on the principles of the municipal English common 
law. No people can break from their past. Bands 
of custom and heredity, invisible as they may be at 
times to all but close students of history, bind every 
generation of men to their historic past. The funda- 
mental principles of the laws and the customs of the 
people of New England can be traced step by step to 
the laws and customs of ancient England and Ger- 
many, and even to the remote villages of the Aryan 
East. As has been finely said by an eminent scholar 
and jurist of our own day. 

When we touch to-day, even in our frontier settlements, 
the electric chain wherewith Providence hath bound the ages and 
the generations of men together, we discover that we are in his- 
toric communion with rude and remote ancestors although sepa- 
rated from us by seas, mountains and centuries.* 

History is like a stream in which every particle af- 
fects the condition and the flow of every other par- 
ticle. It is this historic continuity that gives the 
study of history its chief charm to the philosophic 
mind. The early settlers of New England did not, 
as has sometimes been said, break with their past. 
They could not have done so. They necessarily 
brought with them the ancient and fundamental prin- 

* Dillon, Municipal Corporations, Vol. I, p. 23. 



Warning Out in New England 5 

ciples of the English law, one of which was that the 
inhabitants of a municipality were responsible for the 
conduct and support of each other, each for all and 
all for each. 

The right of inhabitancy, sometimes called the free- 
dom of the community, existed in the Teutonic town- 
ships. Palgrave says: — 

The earliest notices respecting the Teutonic Townships are to 
be collected from the laws of the Salic Franks. A "Villa" was 
entirely the property of the inhabitants, and no stranger could 
settle within its boundaries, unless with the consent of the whole 
incorporation. Any one individual Townsman could forbid the 
entrance of the new colonist upon the common fields of the Sept. 
If, after three warnings had been given, and thirty nights had 
elapsed, the intruder continued contumacious, he was sum- 
moned to the "Mallum" or Court; and in default of appearance, 
the "Gravio" [Mayor] proceeded to the spot, and by force ex- 
pelled the occupant from the purpresture which he had made. 
But it is important to remark, that the freedom of the community 
might be legally acquired by an uncontradicted residence; for if 
the stranger remained in the Township, without challenge, during 
twelve months, he was from thenceforth allowed to dwell in peace 
and security, like the other neighbours of the community.* 

From this custom came the fundamental principle 
of the ancient law of England, that every place where 
people lived must be a free communitj^ or settlement, 
every member of which was answerable for the good 
conduct of, or the damage done by, any one of the 
other members. This obligation was termed "frank- 
pledge," later "peacepledge." Bracton says: — 

Every man, whether free or a serf, either is or ought to be in 
frankpledge or in somebody's household unless he be somebody 
itinerant from place to place, who does not keep himself to one 
more than to another, or who has something which suffices for a 
frankpledge, as a dignity or an order or a free tenement or real 

* Francis Palgrave, Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, London, 
1832, Part I, p. 83. 



6 Warning Out in New England 

l)roperty in a city. . . . Every person who has land and house, 
who are called "householders," ought to be in frankpledge, and 
also others who serve them, who are called "followers." He is 
of the household and family of any one who has food and clothing 
from him, or who has food only with wages such as are the domes- 
tics or servitors and hirelings of the house. 

Likewise according to ancient custom he may be said to be of 
any one's family who has dwelt in the house of another person 
for three nights, because on the first night he may be termed un- 
cuth [unknown] but on the second gust [i.e., guest] on the third 
night hoghenehgue [or his own hind.]* 

Upon this obligation to be in frankpledge, all free- 
men below a certain rank in England were, after the 
Danish conquest, required to be numbered in groups 
of ten, called tithings, and each member of a tithing 
made responsible for the good behavior of every other 
member, f 

This responsibility was at first, by custom only, for a 
payment in money to the persons injured by crime, 
or to his relatives in case he was killed, and for a fine 
to be paid to the king as a punishment for the crime. J 

From this communal responsibility, and from the 
division of land under the feudal system, as perfected 
and extended throughout England after the Norman 
conquest,! the civil institutions and the law of Eng- 
land were developed. 

The local and municipal development of government 
in England was: first, from the hundred; second, from 
the tithings; third, from the parish, or ville, or town. 
The parish was originally intended for secular purposes 

* Bracton, De Legibus Anglice, edition 1879, Vol. II, p. 307. 

t Pike, History of Crime in England, Vol. I, p. 58. 

J Stephen, Criminal Law of England, p. 10. 

§ "Of all the feudal services enforced by the Normans, there is not perhaps 
one of which some obscure trace may not be discovered among the Anglo-Saxons." 
Lingard, History of England, Vol. I, p. 488 (5th edition). 



Warning Out in New England 7 

only, and was responsible for the maintenance of the 
public peace and for the support of the poor.* 
In 1628 Lord Coke defined a town as follows: — 

It cannot be a town in law, unless it hath, or in past time hath 
had, a church, and celebration of divine services, sacraments and 
burial. 

Blackstone in 1765 said, — 

Tithings, towns or villes, are of the same signification in law; 
and are said to have had each of them, originally, a church and 
celebration of divine service, sacraments and burials, though that 
seems to be rather an ecclesiastical than a civil distinction.! 

A later English writer says, — 

The township is now known by its ecclesiastical name of parish, 
and the shire by its Norman name of county, but the old identity 
is still preserved, and the institutions themselves are as much 
alive today as they were a thousand years ago. 

Again the same writer says: — 

The original unit of settlement among the Saxons in England 
was the tun, now town. This meant simply an enclosure sur- 
rounded by a wall or hedge, and the township was merely the 
area claimed by the town. 

In the process of the English civil wars responsible 
local government practically disappeared, and in the 
general break-up of local conditions a question of 
very great magnitude arose, which was the relief of 
the poor. There was no local machinery available for 
this and it was taken up by the parish, which became 
the poor-law unit; that is, the church assumed the duty 
of looking after the poor, which had always been one 
of its primary duties, and hence the poor-law officials 
were elected by the parish vestry, which levied taxes 

* Toulmin Smith, The Parish, pp. 16, 44, 45. 
t Blackstone, Commentaries, Vol. I, p. 115. 



8 Waniiiii? Out in New Endand 



&' 



for the support of the poor upon the householders of 
the parish. 

In 1601, the date of the first great poor law of Eng- 
land, the parish or township began to revive as the 
machinery of local government and highways, bridges, 
drainage, police, education, and other local matters 
became parochial, and the old powers of the town 
meeting were resumed.* 

It was upon this foundation of English affairs that 
the settlers of New England constructed their town 
or local governments. 

Inhabitancy and "warning out" in the New Eng- 
land States were so connected that neither can be 
intelligently considered without examination of the 
other. 

The theory of the early settlers with regard to in- 
habitancy was thus stated in the beginning: — 

If we here be a corporation, established by free consent, if 
the place of our co-habitation be our own, then no man hath right 
to come in to us without our consent. 

Inhabitancy, or the right to live in a town as one of 
its inhabitants, did not necessarily include the right 
to vote in town affairs, nor was it always dependent 
upon the ownership of land. For instance, in the 
Massachusetts Colony the right to vote was confined 
by colony ordinance in 1631 to those inhabitants who 
were in full church communion, which put the govern- 
ment into the hands of a minority of the male inhabi- 
tants.! 

In Plymouth and in Connecticut the franchise 
was given by vote of the freemen of the towns, but the 
candidate was required to be "of sober and peaceable 

* Jenks, English Local Government, pp. 11, 19, 23, 28. 
t Massachusetts Colony Records, Vol. I, p. 87. 



Warning Out in New England 9 

conversation, orthodox in the fundamentals of religion 
and to have at least twenty pounds of rateable estate." * 

It is true the word "inhabitants" was sometimes 
used as though it meant persons entitled to vote, as 
where the record speaks of a town meeting as a general 
meeting of the inhabitants, but I use it here as meaning 
simply persons who had been, by some general law 
or by the action of the town itself, admitted to be 
permanent residents in the town. This right of in- 
habitancy included by the common law of England the 
right to be supported by the town, if the inhabitant 
became unable to support himself. In other words, 
a legal inhabitancy comprehended a legal settlement, 
which in England could be acquired by residence in a 
place for a required period, originally forty days.f 

This responsibility of municipalities for the proper 
conduct and for the support of their inhabitants, when 
they were unable to support themselves, properly im- 
plied the right to exclude from inhabitancy persons 
for whose conduct or support they did not desire to be- 
come responsible. In this is found the effective meaning 
of "giving the freedom of the city"; that is, the right to 
inhabit or dwell in the city. This also is the origin of 
the liability of municipalities for property destroyed in 
riots, which still exists by statute in many cases. | 

It is probably also the origin of the common law of 
the New England States, derived from immemorial 
usage, that the estate of any inhabitant of a town is 
liable to be taken in execution on a judgment against 
the town.§ 

* Plymouth Colony Laws (Brigham edition), 1671, p. 258; Connecticut Colony 
Records, Vol. I, pp. 290, 297, 331, 389, 417. 

t Blackstone, Commentaries, Vol. I, p. 362. 

X General Laws of Rhode Island, 1909, Chap. 344, Sect. 10; Massachusetts Laws, 
1839, Chap. 54, Sects. 2, 3; Revised Laws of Massachusetts, Chap. 211, Sect. 8. 

§ Hill V. Boston, 122 Mass. 349; Beardsley v. Smith, 16 Conn. 368. 



10 Warning Out in New England 

This right of the towns to exchide from inhabitancy 
within their Hmits was undoubtedly exercised in the 
New England Colonies of New Plymouth, Massa- 
chusetts Bay, Connecticut, and even in Rhode Island, 
for the purpose of keeping out persons whose religious 
or political opinions were unsatisfactory to the towns. 
But the reason for the existence of this right was that 
inhabitancy, or the right to live in a place, always 
imposed upon the inhabitants of the place responsi- 
bility for the good conduct and support of the in- 
habitant. 

The right to live in a town was then understood to 
imply a right to have land upon which to live, and 
therefore, when towns admitted persons to be inhabi- 
tants, they impliedly agreed to allot to them land upon 
which they could live as inhabitants from the town 
lands, and to give them the right of commonage in 
the common lands of the town. This also carried with 
it the right of free fishing and fowling in the great 
ponds and in the rivers and tidal-waters within the 
limits of the town.* In some cases, how^ever, this 
right of commonage was restricted by the town in case 
of new-comers. In Boston it was ordered on May 18, 
1648, at a town meeting that all inhabitants who had 
been admitted by the townsmen should have equal 
"Rights of Commonage in the towne," but that no 
one who should thereafter come to be an inhabitant 
in the town should have "right of Commonage" "un- 
lese he hier it of them that are Commoners."! In 
Dorchester on January 18, 1635, it was ordered 

that all the hoame lots within Dorchester Plantation which 
have bene granted before this p'sent day shall have right to the 

* Body of Liberties, 1641; Massachusetts Laws, 1660-1672 (Whitmore edition), 
p. 37. 

t Boston Town Records, 1634-1660, p. 88. 



Warning Out in New England 11 

Commons and no other lotts that are graunted hereafter to be 
commoners: Also that Two men shall not Common for one 
hoame lott.* 

At first it was not the practice to admit persons 
as inhabitants to whom the town could not allot lands 
upon which they could live. But it soon became the 
practice to admit them, provided they could, with the 
consent of the town, purchase land of other inhabi- 
tants to whom land had previously been allotted. 
The New England colonists not only had the Saxon 
greed for land, but their government was based upon 
the ownership of land, so far as possible, by all the 
inhabitants. They believed, and rightly, that noth- 
ing was so sure to give people an interest in sound 
and stable government as the ownership of their 
homes. They sought therefore to secure in some way 
to all the inhabitants of the towns an ownership in 
land, either by giving them lands owned by the towns 
or by requiring them to purchase lands in the towns 
before they became inhabitants. It will be seen 
therefore that a knowledge of inhabitancy in the early 
New England towns, and of the obligation of the in- 
habitants for the good conduct and support of each 
other, requires some reference to the origin of land 
titles in New England. 

The basis of these titles was a grant from the English 
Crown. It is true that deeds of land were taken from 
the Indians, and that they were upheld by the Colonial 
Courts in some cases. f 

It is also the fact that the original title taken by 
the settlers or planters of Rhode Island was by Indian 
grants, and that the early settlers of Connecticut 
also purchased their lands from the Indians in^the 

* Dorchester Town Records, p. 14. 
t Sullivan, Land Titles, p. 43. 



12 Warning Out in New England 

first instance. But in all these cases crown grants 
were afterwards obtained, and the colonies also passed 
acts with regard to the purchase of land from the natives 
without license from the colonies themselves, declar- 
ing all Indian deeds taken without such license to be 
void.* 

It should be remembered, however, that the crown 
grant was not a grant by the English government, 
but solely by the King. 

It has always been the theory of the English law 
that discovery and possession of a new country gave 
a valid title to its land, subject to the natural right of 
the natives to protection, but with no right in the 
natives to dispose of the land to anybody else. Under 
this theory the Crown was the absolute owner of the 
land, and could dispose of it and provide for the gov- 
ernment of it at its discretion. For instance, grants 
could be made by the Crown without regard to the law 
of England, as was done when Charles I. authorized 
the grantees of land in Maryland to erect manors, 
anything in the statutes of quia emptores to the con- 
trary notwithstanding, t 

It was upon this theory of the right of the Crown, 
based upon the discovery by the Cabots in 1497, 
and the subsequent taking formal possession by Sir 
Humphrey Gilbert in 1583, that the land titles of 
the New England Colonies were founded. The crown 
grants of land carried with them the right to ex- 
tinguish the Indian title as a matter of course, but 
that title was recognized as a right of occupancy. 
For instance, when in 1662 the town of Dedham and 

* Connecticut Colomj Records, Vol. I, pp. 214, 3C4, 402; Massachusetts Records, 
Vol. I, p. 112; Plymouth Colony Records, 1634. 

t Hazard, State Papers, Vol. I, p. 335; Kent, Commentaries, Vol. Ill, p. 379 
et seq. 



Warning Out in New England 13 

some of its inhabitants had a controversy with the 
Indians Hving at Naticke as to the title of certain 
lands, the General Court heard the parties and de- 
clared that, though the legal right of Dedham could 
not be denied, yet there had been such encouragement 
of the Indians in their improvement of the land, as 
"added to their native right, which cannot in strict 
justice be utterly extinguished," required that the 
Indians be not dispossessed of the lands they were 
then possessed of, but that compensation be given to 
Dedham out of other lands not then granted.* 

So in 1G72, when certain inhabitants of Northampton 
and other towns desired a grant of land for a village 
at Squakeage, the land was granted upon certain 
conditions, and upon the further condition that, if the 
grantees should purchase the Indian title to the lands, 
it should belong to the colony, unless the grantees 
performed the conditions of the grant, f 

In Rhode Island Roger Williams and his associates 
at first claimed that the only title required was the 
Indian title, and took conveyances of it as the titles 
to the land on which they settled, though they after- 
wards obtained and accepted a crown grant of the 
same land in 1663. J 

The same course was pursued in Connecticut, the 
lands being purchased by the first planters from the 
Indians, or acquired, as in the case of the Pequot 
territorj^ by conquest from the Indians. In 1G62, 
however, the Connecticut Colony obtained a charter 
and a grant from the Crown. § 

* Records of Colony of Massachuscits Bay, Shurtleff edition. Vol. IV, Part II, 
p. 49. 

t Ibid., p. 529. 

X Arnold, History of Rhode Island, Vol. I, pp. 114, 284; Rhode Island Records, 
Vol. I, p. 31 et scq., pp. 130, 134, 135, 143. 

§ Trumbull, History of Connecticut, Vol. I, p. 249. 



14 Warnin": Out in New England 



&' 



New Hampshire was created a royal province in 
1680, the English Courts having held that the title 
was in the Crown, subject only to the vested rights of 
Mason in the soil, and it included, as was claimed, the 
territory now known as Vermont. The titles there 
were, from the government under the crown grants, 
somewhat conflicting, but all resting primarily upon 
the title of the Crown.* 

In Plymouth the land was granted under a patent 
in 1620 and a royal grant in 1629. 

The title to the land in Maine was granted under the 
Crown Charter of 1692, under the jurisdiction of 
Massachusetts, which had a right to grant the lands, sub- 
ject to the approval of the Crown, within two years. f 

|The origin of the title to land in all these colonies 
was, as stated at first, based upon the ownership by the 
Crown arising from discovery and possession, subject 
only to the right of the Indians, as natives of the soil, to 
the enjoyment of it, but with no power of disposal. 

The English royal grants of the territory of the New 
England States began by a commission to John and 
Sebastian Cabot by Henry VH in a.d. 1495, author- 
izing them "to seek out countries or provinces of the 
heathen and infidels, wherever situated, hitherto un- 
known to all Christians, and to subdue and possess 
them as his subjects. "J 

Under this commission the Cabots in 1497-98 landed 
upon the American coast, and explored it to some 
extent from Labrador to the Carolinas, more than a 
year before Columbus had seen the continent. Cabot 
drew charts of his voyage, which were referred to by 
Gilbert as existing in 1576, but have entirely dis- 

* Belknap, History of New Hampshire, Vol. II, p. 205. 
t Maine Historical Collections, Vol. I, p. 239. 
X Hazard's State Papers, Vol. I, p. 9. 



Warning Out in New England 15 

appeared.* Two years later a Portuguese explored 
Labrador. In 1507 the French visited the Gulf of St. 
Lawrence, and made a map of it and the neighboring 
country. 

In 1522 there was a settlement of fishermen at New- 
foundland, comprising, it is said, about fifty houses in- 
habited by people of different nationalities. In 1524 
the French explored the coast from the Carolinas to 
Newfoundland, very much as the Cabots had done, 
but more in detail, and they called the country New 
France. 

From 1534 to 1542 the Spaniards explored the coast 
of Florida, and the French erected monuments in token 
of possession in the region of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. 

England, however, took no steps to maintain her 
rights as a discoverer by taking possession of the ter- 
ritory explored by the Cabots until 1578, when Queen 
Elizabeth gave a patent to Sir Humphrey Gilbert in 
the same terms as that given by Henry VII to the 
Cabots. t Gilbert landed at Newfoundland, called the 
merchants and masters of the ships of the various 
nations then there together, and took possession with 
prescribed legal formalities. He made laws which 
the people promised to obey, and made grants of land 
upon covenants of annual rent. Gilbert was lost 
at sea, but Sir Walter Raleigh, his half-brother and 
partner in the enterprise, obtained a similar patent in 
his own name, under which he was the first to occupy 
the soil of Virginia in 1584. J With his consent Gosnold 
visited Massachusetts Bay in 1602, but before his 
return to England for the purpose of obtaining sup- 
plies to establish settlements Queen Elizabeth died, 

* Sir Humphrey Gilbert, A Discourse of a Discouerie for a New Passage to 
Cataia, London, 1576. 

t Hazard, Vol. I, p. 24. % Hazard. Vol. I, p. 33. 



16 Warning Out in New England 

Raleigh was imprisoned, and all traces of his attempt 
to colonize in America disappeared. 

In 1606 a patent was granted by James I, to Sir 
Thomas Gates and others for the Colony of Virginia, 
but its limits did not include the whole of the English 
claim to title. It extended no further south than the 
present boundaries of North Carolina and no further 
north than the present limits of the State of New 
Hampshire; that is, between 34° and 45° of north 
latitude. It provided for two colonies, one southern, 
between the 34th and 41st degrees, and one northern, 
between the 38th and 45th degrees, leaving, as may 
be seen, three degrees, or the territory from about 
the southern point of Maryland to the southern point 
of Connecticut, as common territory.* 

In 1620 a charter was granted by James I to forty 
persons called "The Council established at Plymouth, 
in the County of Devon, for the Planting, Ruling, and 
Governing of New England in America." This charter 
referred to the patent of 1606, and granted to the 
persons named in it all the territory from the 40th 
to the 48th degrees of north latitude, and from the 
sea to the sea, to be called New England; that is, its 
territory extended from about the latitude of the city 
of Philadelphia to the middle of Newfoundland and 
from the Atlantic to the Pacific, f 

The chief managers of this Council were Sir Fer- 
dinando Gorges, Captain John Mason, and the Earl 
of Warwick, who was president. Gorges was to be 
governor of the new State. The Council made about 
twenty grants under their charter, but fell into diffi- 
culties, and finally came to an end in 1635. J 

* Hazard, Vol. I, p. 50. f Hazard, Vol. I, p. 103. 

t A list of these grants will be found in Palfrey, Vol. I, p. 397, note, and also 
in "History of Grants under the Great Council for New England," by Samuel F. 



Warning Out in New England 17 

March 28, 1629, a patent and charter was granted 
by Charles I to Sir Henry Rosewell, Sir Richard Sal- 
tonstall, John Endecott, and others, as a body corpo- 
rate by the name of the "Governor and Company of 
the Massachusetts Bay in Newe-England."* 

January 13, 1629, a grant was made by Charles I 
to William Bradford and his associates, reciting that 
they had for nine years lived in New England and 
"planted a towne called by the name of New-Plim- 
outh."t 

In 1630 the Council of Plymouth in the County of 
Devon granted to Robert, Earl of Warwick, a part of 
New England, including the later colony of Connecti- 
cut, and it was confirmed to him by a patent from 
Charles I. March 19, 1631, the Earl of Warwick 
granted this territory to William, Viscount Say and 
Seal, and ten others, and the settlers of Connecticut 
were granted their lands by these eleven persons, 
the grantees of Warwick, who was the grantee of 
Charles Lf 

The grants of land by the colonies under these 
grants from the Crown were usually made to "pro- 
prietors," who as such, or as towns, often called "plan- 
tations," granted the lands to such persons as they 
desired to have become inhabitants of the towns. In 
some cases the "proprietors" and the towns acted in- 
dependently, but in most cases the "proprietors" 
were the town, and made grants as such.§ 

Haven, in Lectures on the Early History of Massachusetts, Lowell Institute Course. 
1869. The supplement to this lecture gives an interesting chronological statement 
of the different charters covering the New England States. 

* Hazard, Vol. I, p. 239. f Hazard, Vol. I, p. 298. 

X Trumbull, History of Connecticut, Vol. I, p. 27. 

§ Egleston, Land System of New England, p. 29. 



CHAPTER II. 

Admission of Inhabitants. — Grants of Land by Towns. — 
Restraint of Alienation of Lands. — Proceedings in 
Boston and Other Massachusetts and Plymouth 
Towns. 

At first the New England towns exercised the right 
to exclude new-comers from inhabitancy by providing 
that no person should be received as an inhabitant 
without a vote of the town or of the "townsmen" or 
selectmen, and also by providing that no inhabitant 
should receive or entertain persons who were not ad- 
mitted as inhabitants, or, as they were termed, 
strangers. This right of exclusion from inhabitancy 
was still further exercised by orders providing that 
inhabitants should not sell or let their land or houses 
to strangers without the consent of the town. 

In Connecticut the colony law of 1659 provided that 

No inhabitant shall have power to make sale of his accommo- 
dation of house or lands until he have first propounded the sale 
thereof to the town where it is situate and they refuse to accept 
of the sale tendered.* 

This restraint upon alienation by inhabitants of 
towns was not a new thing. Similar restraints existed 
in the Old World, and exist to-day in the village com- 
munities of Russia, where one may not sell to a stranger 
to the mir, or village, without the consent of the in- 
habitants, f 

In addition to this right to deny admission to the 
town it was assumed that the right to exclude from 
inhabitancy included the right to admit to inhabi- 
tancy upon condition, and the towns frequently ad- 

* Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, Vol. I, p. 351. 
t Egleston, The Land System of the New England Colonies, p. 40; Maine, Early 
History of Institutions, p. 109. 



Warning Out in New England 19 

mitted inhabitants upon conditions, in some cases, 
that the person admitted should set up a mill within 
a given time and should charge only certain prices; in 
others, that he should practise a trade within the 
town; in many cases, that the person should be of 
"peaceable conversation" and of "inoffensive car- 
riage"; and, in still other cases, upon security that 
the person admitted should not become chargeable 
for support to the town at any time. 

The records of Boston and of other towns in the 
Massachusetts and Plymouth Colonies show the action 
of the towns. 

In Boston in November, 1634, it was ordered at a 
general meeting that Mr. Winthrop, then also gov- 
ernor, and six other persons, should have the power 
to divide and dispose of all lands belonging to the 
town, not then in the lawful possession of any par- 
ticular persons, to the inhabitants of the town accord- 
ing to the orders of the Court, leaving such portions 
in common for the use of new-comers and the further 
benefit of the town as in their discretion they should 
see fit. These persons were subsequently termed 
"Allotters." 

In November, 1635, this order was passed at a 
general town meeting: — 

It is agreed that noe further allotments shalbe graunted unto 
any new comers, but such as may be likely to be received members 
of the Congregation: 

That none shall sell their houses or allotments to any new 
comers, but with the consent and allowance of those that are ap- 
pointed Allotters. 

This order against selling land to strangers was en- 
forced. June 6, 1636, an order was made by the 
selectmen as follows : — 

Wee finde that Richard Fairebanke hath sold unto twoe 



20 Warning Out in New England 

straingers the Iwoe houses in Sudbury end that were William 
Balstones, contrary to a former order, and therefore the sayle to 
bee voyd, and the said Richard Fairbancke to forfeite for his 
breaking thereof, xls. 

Wee finde that Isaacke Cullymore Carpenter hath sould his 
house unto a strainger, contrary to the same order, and therefore 
the sayle thereof to bee voyd, and the said Isaacke Cullymore to 
forfeite for his breaking thereof, xls. 

On September 26, 1636, the records of the selectmen 
show that 

it was founde that William Hudson hath sould an housplott and 
garden unto one William Mawer, a strainger, without the consent 
of the appointed Allotters, contrarie to a former order, xx s. 

Also that William Aspewall hath sould a housplott and a gar- 
den unto one M^ Tinge, contrarie to the same order. 2 lb. 

That in like sort M"^. Samuell Cole hath sold an Allotment unto 
one M^ Greenefield, and is to forfett for the breaking of the order 
iii lb. 

On August 7, 1637, the selectmen granted leave to 

Richard Fairbank "to sell his shopp to Saunders, 

a booke-bynder." 

On the 28th of August the record of the selectmen 
shows that 

it is agreed that Richard Hull Carpenter shall have liberty to sell 
his house and ground neere John Galloppe unto Philip Sherman, 
of Roxbury. 

In September, 1637, "Robert Gillam, marryner," was 
given leave "to buy a houseplott where he can." 

In August, 1638, there was leave granted to Fran- 
cis Lyall to become an inhabitant, and leave was 
"graunted to Mr. Thomas Cornnell for the buying of 
our brother Willyam Balstone's house, and to become 
an inhabitant of this Towne." 

On November 2, 1638, "leave is granted to Richard 
Rawlings, a plasterer, to buy Peter Johnson, the Dutch- 



Warning Out in New England 21 

man's house, and to become an Inhabitant of this 
Towne." 

The term "townsman" seems to have been used 
interchangeably with that of inhabitant. November 
19, 1638, the selectmen's records show that 

George Barrill, Cooper, hath for him and his heirs and assigns 
for £28 bought of the said Thomas Painter, his dwelHng-house, 
with the Appurtenances, and ground Under it, in this towne, 
and whereto he had the Consent of the Townesmen, and soe is 
admitted a Townesman upon Condition of Inoffensive Carryage. 

[In December] one Wilham Teffe, a Taylor, is allowed to bee an 
Inhabitant, and hath this day fully agreed with Jacob Wilson of 
his house, and the ground under it, in this towne. 

Also Esdras Reade, a Taylor, is this day allowed to bee an 
inhabitant, and to have a great Lot at Muddy River for 4 heads. 

In January, 1638, appears the first record with re- 
gard to the liability of the town for the support of a 
person admitted into it. The record of the selectmen 
is as follows: — 

Richard Tuttell, our brother, hath undertaken for one Dorothie 
Bill, a Widowe, a Soiourner in his house to discharge the Towne of 
any Charge that may befall the Towne for any thing about her. 

In the next month the record shows that 

Richard Wright hath sold 130 Acrs of land at Mount Woolly- 
stone to one M"^. Pane, of Concord, without the consent of the 
Towne's Allotters, contrary to a former Order, and he is there- 
fore to pay for a Fyne to the towne's stocke, to be paid at the next 
Towne's Meeting the sume of £6. 

On August 12, 1639, the record shows that 

John Seaborne, a Taylor, having served for the space of three 
years within this Towne, is granted to be an Inhabitant. 

Also that in the next month Mr. Richard Parker, 
merchant, was allowed to be an inhabitant, and Mr. 
Thomas Foule also allowed to be an inhabitant. 



22 Warning Out in New England 

The church relations of the early settlers is shown by 
the form of the following entries. 

On November 25, 1G39, the record of the selectmen 
shows that 

John Seaberry, a Seaman hath with leave bought our brother 
Water Merrye's house, and Half an Acre under it in the Mylne 
feild, and so is allowed for an Inhabitant. 

Also Richard Storer, the Sonne of EHzabeth Hull, the Wife of 
our brother Roberte Hull, is Allowed to be an Inhabitant and to 
have a great Lott at the Mount for three heads. 

Also our brother Arthure Perry hath leave to sell his house and 
garding to Silvester Saunders whoe (hath) long beene a servant in 
this towne. 

The entries of permission or allowance to become an 
inhabitant occur with increasing frequency in 1639, 
1640, and thereafter for a few years. One of them 
shows that the town regarded it as important that 
everybody should own his home. 

On March 16, 1640, the record of the selectmen is that 

John Palmer, Carpenter, now dwelling here, is to be allowed 
an Inhabitant, if he can gett an house, or land to sett an house 
upon (it being not proper to allowe a man an Inhabitant Withou(t) 
habitation). 

Frequently the question of whether a person should 
be received as an inhabitant was taken under considera- 
tion. One of the records in 1640 shows that several 
persons were accepted for townsmen, but that "Edw. 
Arnoll is taken into Consideration until the next meet- 
ing to becom a townsman." 

Apparently, persons came into the town and there 
stayed, so that they were likely in fact to become in- 
habitants, although not admitted, for we find that on 
March 1, 1647, the following order was passed: — 

It is ordered that no Inhabitant shall entertaine man or woman 
from any other towne or Countrye as a sojourner or inmate with 



Warning Out in New England 23 

an intent to reside here, butt shall give notice thereof to the Select- 
men of the towne for their approbation within 8 dayes after their 
Cominge to the towne upon penalty of twenty shillings. 

It is farther ordered that no Inhabitant shall farme, lett, or putt 
to sale to any person any howse or howses within this towne, 
without first acquaintinge the select men of the town their- 
with. 

In December, 1652, appears the first entry of the 
admission of a person as a townsman or inhabitant 
upon security. The record is: — 

Att a metting of all the Seleckt men, William Gilford, Brike- 
layer, is admitted a Townsman. M^ Richard Bellingham in- 
gageth to secur the town from all dammag by Receiving of 
hime for one whole yeare. 

At the same meeting "M^. Pighogg, a Chururgeon, 
is admitted a Townsman," "John Lewes is fyned 5s. 
for Intertaining of Francis Burges without libertie 
of the seleckt men," and "Good° Watters is fyned 
tenn shillings for Intertaining of Roger Sowers with- 
out libertie form the seleckt men." 

On June 28, 1654, William Bruff was admitted as an 
"Inhabytant, William Wenbourne standing bound 
to the towne that he shall nott be Chargeable 
thereto." 

[Again, February 25, 1655] Nathaneell Woodard is admitted 
an inhabitant, and Thomas Harwood bound in a bond of 20/. to 
secure the towne from any charge that may arise by the sayd 
Wodard or his family. 

On March 31, 1656, the following record is made, 
which is the first record, I think, of any warning out 
in New England: — 

Richard Pittman is fined twenty shillings for nott giving 
security to save the towne from charge, and to depart the towne 
forthwith if hee put nott in security. 

Numerous entries follow of fines imposed for enter- 



24 Warning Out in New England 

taining persons without consent of the town, of which 
these are iHustrative: — 

[March 26, 1657] George Burrill, Cooper, is fined ten shillings 
for intertaining Jno Gilbert into his family, withoutt consent of 
the towne. . . . Ralph Hutchinson is fined ten shillings for inter- 
taining Jno. Gilbert into his family, withoutt the townes mens 
consent. . . . John Hart is fined ten shillings for intertaining 
Jno. Gilbert into his family, withoutt the townesmens consent. 

On April 27, 1657, there are the following records, 
showing the manner in which security was given for 
persons admitted into the town: — 

Richard Way is admitted into the Town, provided that Aron 
Way doe become bound in the sum of twenty pound sterll. to free 
the Town from any charge that may accrew to the town by the 
said Rich'^. or his family. 

Richard Smith is admitted into the Town, being Comended 
to the Town by M*^. Jno. Willson, senr., provided that Henry 
Blague and John Pease, become bound to the Town in the sum 
of twenty pounds sterll. 

We, William Blague and John Pease, doe heerby bind our 
selves, our Jieires, executors, &c., joyntly and severally in the full 
suin of twenty pound sterll. unto the select men of Boston and 
their successors, to secure the Town from all charge from tyme to 
tyme from the said Rich"^ Smith and his family: and hereunto 
put our hands. 

On June 29, 1657, there is the following entry, which, 
I think, is the first with regard to support by the 
town : — 

It is ordered that Ensigne Jno. Web shall suply Richard San- 
furd with such necesary support as the little infant Mary Lang- 
ham or the nurse thereof? either have or shall expend, untell the 
Town take further order. 

It appears that on December 29, 1057, Richard 
Seward was admitted an inhabitant, Nat Fryar being 
bound in a bond of twenty pounds to secure the town 
from charge. Derman Mahoone was fined twenty 



Warning Out in New England 25 

shillings for " intertaining two Irish women contrary 
to an order of the towne, in that case provided and 
is to quitt his house of them forthwith att his perill." 
On January 25, 1657, it was recorded that 

Elizabeth Blesdale hath Hberty to reside in the towne, and 
WilHam Beamsley is bound in a bond of twenty pounds to save 
the towne from any charge that may arise by her during her said 
residence, which is acknowledged by William Beamsleay. 

At this time, admission as an inhabitant upon the 
security given by some person to save the town harm- 
less from any charge that might afterwards arise 
seems to have become general, and the bond of secu- 
rity was ordinarily twenty pounds.* 

In 1659 the entertainment of persons not admitted 
as inhabitants seems to have reached such an extent 
that a general order for the protection of the town was 
deemed proper, and the following order was passed 
June 13, 1659, at a general town meeting: — 

Whereas sundry inhabitants in this towne have nott so well 
attended to former orders made for the securing the towne from 
charge by sojourners, inmates, hyred servants, journeymen, or 
other persons that come for help in physick or chyrurgery, whereby 
no litle damage hath already, and much more may accrew to the 
towne. For the prevention whereof Itt is therefore ordered, that 
whosoever of our inhabitants shall henceforth receive any such 
persons before named into their howses or employments without 
liberty granted from the select men, shall pay twenty shillings 
for the first weeke, and so from weeke to weeke, twenty shillings, 
so long as they retaine them, and shall beare all the charge that 
may accrew to the Towne by every such sojourner, journeyman, 
hired servt., Inmate, &c., received or employed as aforesaid. 
Provided, alwayes, that if any person so receiving any shall, 
within fifteene dayes, give sufficient security unto the select men 
that the Towne may be secured from all charges that may arise 
by any person received, and that the persons so received bee not 
of notorious evill life and manners, their fine abovesaid shall bee 

* See Boston Town Records, 1634-1660. 



26 Warning Out in New England 

remitted or abated according to the discretion of the select men. 
And itt is further ordered that if after bond given by any, they 
give such orderly notice to the select men that the towne may bee 
fully cleared of such person or persons so received according to 
law, then their bonds shall be given in againe. * 

In Woburn no one was allowed to become an in- 
habitant without first producing evidence of his peace- 
able behavior, and by consent of the selectmen or 
the town at a public meeting. One of the original 
town orders provided that no person should enter- 
tain any inmate in his family, whether married or 
otherwise, for more than three days without the con- 
sent of four selectmen, under penalty of sixpence 
for the use of the town for every day. 

These orders were rigorously enforced by fines for 
a long series of years. f 

In 1648 a stranger was admitted an inhabitant of 
Woburn and permitted to buy land for his convenience, 
"provided he unsettle not any inhabitant and bring 
testimony of his peaceable behaviour which is not in 
the least measure questioned."! 

In Scituate it was provided in 1673 that no one 
should have any interest in the undivided lands "that 
is not allowed and approved as an inhabitant of the 

* See Boston Town Records, 1634-1660, p. 152. 

This was but doing in New England what was done at the same time to 
some extent in England. March 13, 1664, the Steeple-Ashton vestry voted as 
follows : — 

" Item, Whereas there hath much poverty happened unto this parish by re- 
ceiving of Strangers to inhabit there and not first securing them against such 
contingencies, and for avoiding the like occasions in time to come, — It is or- 
dered by this Vestry that every person who shall let or set any housing or dwell- 
ing to any Stranger, and shall not first give good security for defending and 
saving the said inhabitants from future charge as may happen by such Stranger 
coming to inhabit within the said parish, shall be rated to the poor to 20s. 
monthly, over and besides his monthly tax." 

t Bewail, History of Wohurn, pp. 47, 48. 
X Town Records of Woburn, Vol. I, p. 13. 



Warning Out in New England 27 

town of Scituate." And in 1667 the town voted that, 
if any person should entertain a stranger after being 
admonished by a committee appointed for that pur- 
pose, he should be punished by a fine of ten shillings 
for each week. 

At the same meeting the town voted "that Mr. 
Black should depart the Towne presently."* 

In Springfield there were very full orders in regard 
to the admission of inhabitants. In 1638 it was pro- 
vided that no man should sell his lot to another in- 
habitant that had a lot, and that no man should pos- 
sess two lots without the consent of the town till he 
had been an inhabitant five years; and that, if any 
man desired to sell his lot to a stranger, he might do 
it if the town did not "disallow of ye sd stranger," 
and, if it did disallow the admission of the stranger, 
then it should buy the lot at an appraisal within 
twenty days, or it should be deemed that the town 
allowed purchase by the stranger. This order was 
later changed so as to provide that no inhabitant 
should sell or let his land to any stranger without 
notifying the selectmen who the stranger was, and 
they allowing the admission of the stranger as an 
inhabitant, under penalty of twenty shillings or for- 
feiting the land, and, if the townsmen disallowed the 
admission of the purchaser, then the town might 
within thirty days buy the land at an appraisal, or, 
if they did not, then the land might be sold to the 
stranger who "should be esteemed as entertained or 
alowed of by the towne as an inhabitant."! 
In 1642 the following vote was passed: — 

It is agreed with the generall consent and vote of the Inhabitants 
of Springfield: That if any man of this Township shall under the 

* Deane, Tlistory of Scituate, pp. 11, 110. 
t Green, History of Springfield, pp. 48, 49. 



28 Warning Out in New England 

Colour of friendship or otherwise intertayne any person or per- 
sons here, to abide or continue as inmates, or shall subdivide 
theyr house lots to entrtayne them as tenants or otherwise, for a 
longer tyme than one month, or 31 days, without the generall 
consent & allowance of the inhabitants (children or servants of 
the family that remayne single persons excepted) shall forfeit for 
the first default xx shillings, to be destrayned by the Constable 
of their goods, cattell or chattails, for y*^ publique use of the In- 
habitants: And alsoe he shall forfeit xx shillings per month for 
every month that any such person or persons shall soe continue 
in this township, with out the generall consent of the Inhabitants: 
and if in y*^ tyme of theyr abode after y° limitation they shall 
neede releefe, not being able to mayntayne themselves, then he 
or they that entertayne such persons shall be lyable to be rated by 
the Inhabitants for y^ releife & maintenance of the said party or 
parties, as the Inhabitants shall think meete. 

In 1G59 John Wood was called to account for giving 
entertainment to Isaac Hall for the space of two months, 
and was fined forty shillings. Quince Smith was re- 
garded as another undesirable person, and was given 
liberty to tarry in town "2 months from y® 18th of 
December, 1660; if he tarry longer it must be by a 
new liberty from y^ selectmen," and on the 18th of 
February he was warned by the selectmen to depart 
the town. 

The sons of even the first settlers of Springfield were 
not admitted as inhabitants, to be voters and assume 
the responsibilities of citizenship, without giving bonds 
to the town to secure it against any charge which might 
possibly arise on their account. Deacon Chapin gave 
bonds of twenty pounds each when two of his sons were 
admitted, Henry in 1660 and Josiah in 1663. At the 
time of Henry's admission Elizur Holyoke gave bonds 
in the sum of twenty pounds to the town treasurer for 
the admission of Samuel Ely "to secure the town from 
any charge which may a rise to the town by the ad- 
mission of the said Ely or his family."* 

* Burt, First Century of History of Springfield, 1636-1736, Vol. I, pp. 53, 54. 



Warning Out in New England 29 

In Cliarlestown as early as October 13, 1634, it was 
ordered "that none be permitted to sit down and 
dwell in this town without the consent of the town 
first obtained"; and February 21, 1637, "that no free- 
man should entertain any in their houses, but to give 
notice thereof at the next town meeting," and "none 
that are not free should entertain any without the 
consent" of three of the selectmen. 

The following instances from the early records 
further illustrate this. In 1637 John Harvard, the 
founder of Harvard College, and others were admitted 
as inhabitants by the following order: — 

"Mr. John Harvard is admitted a townsman with promise of 
such accommodations as we best can"; "Mr. Francis Norton is 
admitted a Townsman if he please"; in 1G35 "Goodman Rand 
granted to set down with us upon condition the Town have no 
just ground of exception"; in 1636 "Ralph Smith was admitted 
a month upon trial"; in 1637 James Hoyden was admitted "if 
the court give way"; John Mosse, "newly out of his time," was 
admitted "for this year to Hve with his master in his family upon 
trial"; "Timothy Ford upon his good behaviour was admitted to 
plant and to be at Richard Kettle's for planting time, or to pro- 
pound another place"; in 1638 "Turner was permitted for the 
present to sojourn with Henry Bullock till next meeting, in mean 
time to be enquired of." 

On April 3, 1638, it was ordered that 

No freeman shall entertain any person or persons at their 
houses, but to give notice to the Townsmen [Selectmen] within 
fourteen days; and such as are net free, not to entertain any at 
all without consent of six of the men deputed for the town affairs; 
and these to acquaint the town therewith at their next meeting, 
upon penalty of ten shillings for every month that they keep 
them without the town's consent; and the constable is to see this 
order observed from time to time, and to gather up the aforesaid 
fines by w^ay of distress.* 

* Frothingham, History of Ckarlestoivn, pp. 54, 55. 



30 Warning Out in New England 

The following votes and orders are found on the 
records of Cambridge, then Newtowne: — 
On December 5, 1636, it was 

Ordered, That no man inhabiting or not inhabiting within 
the bonnds of the town shall let or sell any house or land unto 
any, without the consent of the Townsmen then in place, unless 
it be to a member of the congregation; and lest any one shall 
sustain loss thereby, they shall come and proffer the same unto 
them, upon a day of the monthly meeting, and at such a rate 
as he shall not sell or let for a lesser price unto any than he offer- 
eth unto them, and to leave the same in their hands, in liking, 
until the next meeting day in the next month, when, if they shall 
not take it, paying the price within some convenient time, or pro- 
vide him a chapman, he shall then be free to sell or let the same 
unto any other, provided the Townsmen think them fit to be re- 
ceived in. 

Ordered, That whosoever entertains any stranger into the 
town, if the congregation desire it, he shall set the town free of 
them again within one month after warning given them, or else 
he shall pay 19s. 8d. unto the townsmen as a fine for his default, 
and as much for every month they shall there remain.* 

In March, 1695,— 

Voted that if any person in this Town, do Let or Tenant his 
house or land, within this Town to any person that is not an in- 
habitant in this Town, without first applying themselves to the 
Select men then in being for their approbation, and give in Bond 
to the Select men Sufficient to keep the Town from charge; if 
they do refuse or Neglect So to doe as above, they shall then pay a 
fine of fifteen shillings p month to the use of the Town for their 
neglect, so long as they Shall entertaine such Inhabitants or In- 
mates in their houses, f 

On January 5, 1634, it was ordered by the town that 
every person to whom land was granted should either 
improve it or return it to the town, and, if he im- 
proved it, he should not sell it without first offering 
it to the town. 

* Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, p. 40. 
t Proprietors' Records of the Town of Cambridge, 1635-1820, p. 209. 



Warning Out in New England 31 

In 1636 it was ordered that 

Noe man Inhabiting or not I/^habiting with in the bowndes of 
the towne shall lett or sell anie howse or Land vnto anie without 
the consent of the townsme^^ then in place vnlesse it be to a memb'^ 
of the congregatio & least anie one shall sustaine losse therby 
they shall come & prffer the same vnto them vppon a daye of ye: 
monethly meeting & att such a Rate as he shall not sell or lett 
for a lesser price vnto anie than he offereth vnto them & to leave 
the same in there handes in lyking vntill the next Meeting daye 
in the next moneth when yf they shall not take it paying the 
pryce within some convenient tyme or prvdye him a chapman he 
shall then be free to sell or lett ye same vnto anie oth prvyed the 
townsmen think them fitt to be received in. 

And it was also ordered: — 

That whosoeve' entertaynes anie p( ) stranger into 

the towne yf the congregation desyr it he shall set the towne free 
of them againe with one moneth aft"^ warnig giuen them or else 
he shall paye 10^ 8^ vnto the townsmen as a fyne for his default 
& as muche for cure moneth they shall ( ) Remaine. 

In 1644 

for preventing all inconveniences herein, it is Ordered by the 
Towsmen that no man shall Lett out his house to any per- 
son comeing from any other place to settle him or her self as an 
Inhabitant in o"" Towne, with out the consent of the major pr* 
of the Townsmen for the time being, under the penalty of twenty 
shillings a weeke for eu^'ie such default. 

In 1658 the following "proposiccon was voted by 
the Towne in the affirmative" in regard to the "Great 
Swamp lying within the bounds of this towne": — 

That no person that hath any part or parcell thereof granted 
vnto him or shall purchase any part thereof, shall alienate the 
Same to any person not inhabiting w*'' in the bounds of this Towne, 
on penalty of forfeiting the Said land vnto the vse of the Towne.* 

At a meeting of the selectmen in 1664, 

Thomas Gleison who had been in town about a week being sent 

* Records of the Toim of Cambridge, pp. 24, 50, 125. 



32 Warning Out in New England 

for to appeare before the Select men, was warned to provide Him- 
selfe, the Townsemen not seeing meet to allow of Him as an In- 
habitant in this Towne. * 

The records of Salem show that nobody was per- 
mitted to become an inhabitant except by authority 
of the Town or the Selectmen, but land was not always 
allotted to persons so received. In 1636 the record 
shows that 

m" Keniston is recieued for Inhabitant but not to haue land but 
what she purchaseth, & so hath purchased Lieft: Dauenports 
house. 

In February, 1636, Debora Holmes was refused an 
allotment of land because she was a maid, and it 
"would be a bad president to keep hous alone." As 
a solace for this rejection, however, it appears that she 
was given four bushels of corn. 

On the 23d of the same month various persons 
were received for inhabitants, one without grants of 
land and one "to purchase his accomodacon." Simi- 
lar entries were very frequent during 1636 and 1637 
and the following years of the early settlement of the 
town.f 

In Dedham the town covenant signed by the first 
settlers, 126 in number, in 1636 provided as follows: — 

We engage by all means to keep off from our company such as 
shall be contrary-minded, and receive only such into our society 
as will in a meek and quiet spirit promote its temporal and spirit- 
ual good. 

The first by-law adopted provided that a committee 
should be appointed to examine the character of new- 
comers, and make report of their inquiries to the town, 
and that all persons coming into the town should 

* Town Records of Cambridge, p. 155. 

t Town Records of Salem, 1634-1659 (William P. Upham, Essex Institute 
Historical Collections), pp. 32, 35. 



Warning Out in New England 33 

declare their names and explain their motives, and 
that servants should bring testimony of good char- 
acter before being permitted to abide in the town.* 

In Watertown it was voted that "no foreigner of 
England or some other plantation shall have liberty 
to sit down amongst us, unless he first have the con- 
sent of the freemen of the town."t 

In 1680 an inhabitant was brought before the 
selectmen to answer for entertaining one of his sisters 
who was newly married, and required to give a bond 
for forty pounds in behalf of his sister and her husband 
that they should not become chargeable to the town.| 

In 1644 it was ordered by the townsmen of Cam- 
bridge that 

no person with his family shall come as an Inhabitant in to o' 
Towne, with out the consent of the major part of the Townsmen 
for the time being, under the penalty of 20^. for eu'^ie weeke.§ 

In Lancaster it was ordered that "for the better 
preserving of the puritie Religion and ourselves from 
the infection of Error not to distribute allotments and 
to receive into the plantation as inhabitants any 
excommunicate or otherwise profane and scandalous 
(known so to be) nor any notoriously erring against 
the doctrine and discipline of the churches and the 
State and Government of this Common weale."|| 

In Groton, June 2, 1669, we find the record to be 
that "the towne did solemlie determine to take in 
no more but a taylear and a smith," and later that "it 
was the towne's mind" that "onely a smith and no 
other" could be admitted.** 

* Worthington, History of Dedham, pp. 32, 33. 
t Bond, History and Genealogy of Watertown, p. 995. 

X MacLear, Early New England Toivns, Columbia University Studies, Vol. 
XXIX, No. 1, p. 134. 

§ Cambridge Town Records, p. 50. || Early Records of Lancaster, p. £8. 

** Green, Early Records of Groton, pp. 25, 26. 



34 Warning Out in New England 

In Braintree, Massachusetts, it was ordered in 1641, 
that no inhabitant should sell or dispose of any house 
or land "to any one that is not received an inhabitant 
into the town" without it was first offered to the 
selectmen, and, in case it was not bought by them 
within twenty days, then it might be sold, but only 
"to such as the townsmen shall approve." 

In March, 1681, it was ordered that no inhabitant 
should entertain any stranger without leave from the 
selectmen upon penalty of ten shillings for every three 
days of such entertainment.* 

In Weymouth in 1646 a vote was passed forbidding 
any inhabitant from receiving as an inmate any stranger 
without giving the town an indemnity bond against 
damage under a penalty of a fine of five shillings per 
week; and no inhabitant could sell or let to any stranger 
either house or land without having first tendered the 
same to the town at a training, lecture, or other public 
meeting.! 

The early settlers of Medfield in 1650 signed an 
agreement, the preamble to which is interesting: — 

Forasmuch as for the further promulgation of the Gospell the 
subdueing of this pt of the earth amongst the races given to the 
sonns of Adam & the enlargmt of the bounds of the habitations 
formerly designed by God to som of his people in this wilderness 
it hath pleased the Lord to move and direct [etc.]. 

The third article of the agreement was that 

We shall all of us in the said Towne Faithfully endeavour tht 
onely such be receaved to our societie & Township as we may have 
sufficient satisfaction in, that they ar honest, peacable, & free 
from scandall and eronious opinnions. 

In Saco it was voted by the townsmen, September 
27, 1653, that Roger Spencer and "his heirs forever" 

* Bates, Braintree Toicn Records, pp. 2, 20. 
t Nash, History of Weymouth, p. 32. 



Warning Out in New England 35 

should have liberty to set up a saw-mill, provided he 
did so within a year, and on condition that all towns- 
men should have boards twelvepence in a hundred 
cheaper than any stranger, and also that townsmen 
should be employed in the mill before a stranger, "pro- 
vided they doo their worke so cheap as a stranger." 

In a similar grant in January, 1654, to one John 
Davis, it was a condition of the grant that he should 
employ townsmen before others, strangers, and buy 
provisions of townsmen before strangers at price cur- 
rent, and that the town was to have boards for their 
own use at tenpence a hundred under current price. 

In 1654 it was ordered "that if any outner desire to 
come into towne to inhabite they shall put in sufisient 
security not to be chargeable to the towne."* 

In Billerica, in November, 1654, the town adopted 

Sertin Orders made by vs the present inhabitantes of the Towne 
of Billericey, for y*' weall of y^ [town] : 

l'\ [That whjat person or persons soever [shall] propound 
themselves to be [inhabi]tantes amongste vs, to p^'take of [the 
pr]iviledges of the comons, devitions [of la]ndes, &c., if not known 
to vs, he or they shall bring with them a certificate from the place 
from whence they come, such a testimony as shall be satisfactory 
to o' towne, or select p^sons of the same, before they shall be ad- 
mitted as inhabitants amongste vs, to p'"take of any priviledges 
as aforesaid with vs; and after their Admission they shall sub- 
scribe their names to all the orders of the Towne, with o'selves, 
y* are or shall be made for the public good of the place, as also 
for baring vp their proportions in all publique charges, in Church, 
Towne, or comon weall, with those persons that came vp at the 
first, and so shall have their priviledges in equall proportion, f 

In Chelmsford an order was passed as early as 
1656 that no person should own land until he had been 
approved and admitted as an inhabitant by a majority 

* Folsom, History of Saco and Biddeford, pp. 99, 100. 
t Hazen, History of Billerica, Massachusetts, p. 53. 



36 Warning Out in New England 

vote at a public town meeting. In the same year an 
inhabitant was admitted and granted land, "provided 
he set up his trade of weaving and perform the town's 
work." Another inhabitant was admitted and given 
a grant of land, "provided he set up a saw-mill and 
supply the town with boards at three shillings a hun- 
dred, or saw one log for the providing and bringing of 
another." This inhabitant, Samuel Adams, was also 
granted other land in consideration of his putting up 
a corn-mill, and the town passed an order "that no 
other corn-mill shall be erected for this town, provided 
the said Adams keep a sufficient mill and miller."* 

In 1657 the selectmen of Salem cautioned the in- 
habitants of that town to comply with the colony 
ordinance of 1637 with regard to admitting inhabi- 
tants, upon a penalty of twenty shillings a week during 
its violation. 

In 1660 two persons were fined in Salem for enter- 
taining a stranger. In 1669 two persons were fined 
twenty shillings apiece for entertaining a Quaker, 
who was warned to depart, but persevered and sub- 
sequently became an inhabitant. In 1670 a person 
was appointed and instructed 

to goe from house to house aboute the towne, once a moneth, to 
inquire what strangers are come, or haue priuily thrust themselues 
into towne and to giue notice to the Selectmen in beinge, from 
tyme to tyme, and he shall haue the fines for his paynes or such 
reasonable satisfaction as is meet. 

In Rowley, in 1660, it was ordered: — 

That no land be sold or granted by the Town unless twice pub- 
lished to the Town in open meeting on different days previous 
to the day the grant is made. The consent of adjoining owners 
is also required. The towns are not to exchange any land but 
in the same way. No tenant is to be taken into any house but by 

* Allen, History of Chelmsford, pp. 17, 18. 



Warning Out in New England 37 

consent of the Town on penalty of 19 shillings per month. No 
man is to sell house or land to a stranger without first offering it 
to the Selectmen to be appraised by indifferent men on penalty 
of 19 shillings per month for each parcel.* 

In Hadley it was voted, October 8, 1660, that no 
person should be owned for an inhabitant or have 
liberty to vote or act in town affairs until he should be 
legally received as an inhabitant. f 

In Andover in 1660 persons were prohibited to build 
upon any house lots not granted to them for that pur- 
pose upon a penalty of twenty shillings a month, the 
records stating that "the town having given house- 
lots to build on to all such as they have received as 
inhabitants of the town."{ 

In 1661 it was ordered by the town of Sandwich 
that two persons 

have power to take notice of such as intrude themselves into the 
town without the town's consent and prevent their residing here.§ 

On December 3, 1668, the town of Plymouth voted 
that 

The Celect men shall hensforth have full power to Require any 
that shall Receive any stranger soe as to entertaine them into 
theire house to give Cecuritie unto them to save the Towne harm- 
les from any damage that may acrew unto them by theire en- 
tertainment of such as aforsaid, 

and also voted that "John Everson be forthwith warned 
to depart the towne with all Convenient speed." 

On August 22, 1681, the town passed an order that 

Noe houskeeper or other in this Towne Resideing in the Towne 
shall entertaine any stranger into theire houses above a fort- 
night without giveing Information to the Celect men or some one 

* Gage, History of Rowley, p. 140. 

t Judd, History of Hadley, p. 23. 

% Abbott, History of Andover, p. 48. 

§ Freeman, History of Cape Cod, Vol. II, p. 266. 



38 Warning Out in New England 

of them therof upon the forfeiture of ten shillings a weeke for all 
such time as any such stranger shalbe soe entertained and stay 
without the said Information: To be levied on the estate of such 
house keepers or others that shall neglect to Informe as aforsaid : 
And incase the Celect men upon Information as aforsaid shall 
see cause to either take bonds for every such stranger either; 
to keep and save the Towne harmles from any damage that may 
acrew unto the Towne by the stay of such stranger or strangers 
in the Towne or expell them out of the Towne; the Celect men 
are heerby Impowered to doe either as they shall see Reason and 
cause.* 

In Middleboro inhabitants were admitted by a vote 
of the town. One record, June 11, 1695, reads, — 

"The town jointly agreed together by their vote to 
accept of certain" persons named "as townsmen and 
to have the privileges of the same."t 

In Roxbury in 1672 it was ordered that no new person 
should be admitted to any family for more than one 
week without permission from the selectmen under a 
penalty of twenty shillings. J 

The division of lands to inhabitants, the restraint 
upon alienation of lands, admission of inhabitants 
and warning out of persons not admitted, are well 
illustrated in the conduct of the early settlers of 
Dorchester. The settlers of this town agreed on 
October 8, 1633, to meet once a month at eight o'clock 
in the morning, and 

presently upon the beating of the drum, at the meeting house, 
there to settle such orders as may tend to the general good. 

In November of the same year they ordered that 
such as desired to have lots should manifest the same 
upon the monthly meetings, that then the inhabi- 
tants present might act upon the same, and, if they 

* Records of the Town of Plymouth, Vol. I, pp. 106, 169. 
t Weston, History of Middleboro, p. 561. 
t Roxbury Town Records, p. 72. 



Warning Out in New England 39 

approved, decide where the lands were to be given in 
the town. In the next year on November 3 they 
ordered 

that no man within the Plantation shall sell his house or lott to 
any man without the Plantation whome they shall dislike off. 

In December, 1658, the town took action as follows: 

Whereas the generall Court hath taken care what strangers 
shall Reside in this iurisdiction and how lisenced as by the law 
title strangers it doth appeare, but haue taken noe order for 
families ore p'sons that remoue from one towne in this Jurisdic- 
tion to an other: now to p'vent such inconvenience as may come 
if euery one be at liberty to receive into this towne whom they 
please. It is ordered therfore by the select men of this towne 
that if any maner of p'son ore p'sons in this towne shall inter- 
taine any soiornour ore inmate into his or ther house ore habita- 
tion aboue one weeke without lisence from the selectmen ore the 
maior parte of them first had and obtained, shall forfeit five 
shillings, and for every weekes continuance three shillings foure 
pence. And if any p'son as afore sayd shall receiue any family 
into his or ther house ore habitation longer then the time aboue 
sayd shall forfeit the penaltie of twenty shillings, and for euery 
weekes continuance 13'': 4^: all which fines shall be forth with 
taken by distresse ore otherways by warent from the select men 
from time to time. 

On December 9, 1664, we find this order: — 

This same day Clement Maxfild, appeared before the select 
men, and desired that his Brother John Maxfild, being arrived 
lately from England, might continue in the Towne with him; 
and that he would secure the Towne, from any danmiage, during 
his residence here, which was granted that he, the sayd Clement 
Maxfild, might, entertaine his brother as is aboue expressed, 
vntiU such time, as his Brother, shall otherwise settle himself 
heere, or elswhere. 

The Selectmen of Dorchester doe accept of the Request of 
the Selectmen of Boston on the behalfe of the widow Collins, 
and doe grant her liberty to remaine, and reside here amongst 
us, till the 1. day of May, 1666. 



40 Warning Out in New England 

On December 12, 1665, the record shows the fol- 
lowing : — 

There was presented vnto the Selectmen of Dorchester a note 
from the Select men of Boston, containing a Request from them, 
that the Widow Collins might be permitted by us to passe the 
winter here in our Towne and thereby engaging themselues, that 
her reception should not disoblige them from the duty they owe 
her, as one of their Inhabitants. 

In 1667 

Frances Oliuer came to the Select men and desiered liberty to 
be an inhabetant in this towne but he refusing to secuer the towne 
from damedge was not admitted. 

In 1667 there is the following order: — 

Richard Curtice came to the Select men, and desiered ther ap- 
p'bation to Come into the Towne to line, which was granted on 
Condition that he doe make ouer his house and land at Melton 
for the Towns Security that he be not chargable to the towne. 

And 

the same day William Sumner was desiered to speak with the 
Widdow Hims (who is lately come into this towne) to informe 
her that she must returne to the place from whence she came. 

In April, 1668, Ralph Bradice was admitted as an 
inhabitant upon the agreement of John Gornell, in 
whose house he was, that he would be bound to secure 
the town from any damage therefrom. In the same 
year we find that 

Frances Oliuer Came againe and desiered liberty to stay in 
the Towne and for that end brought Thomas Bird and Joseph 
Long to be bound for him but they vnderstanding that they must 
be bound to Cleere him wholly from the Towne for three months 
after he was remoued, refused soe to doe and therfore the said 
Oliuer was againe warned to depart the Town. 

Family relations had no effect upon this conduct of 
the town with regard to inhabitancy. On November 
13, 1669, the record shows that 



Warning Out in New England 41 

it was agreed that ther should be an order sent to John pope 
(the Select men vnder standing that a daughter of his is to come 
from Boston into his famely) that he doe forthwith come to the 
Select men and giue Securety to saue the Towne harmles from 
Damedg or els to expect the penalty which the towne order lays 
vpon such as entertaine Inmats. 

In January, 1670, it appears that notice was given 
to Henery Merrifeild 

to discharge the towne of his daughter Funnell which hath been 
at his hous about a weeke; vnless he gitt a note vnder the hands 
of the Select men of Melton that they will receaue her againe if 
need be and to looke at her as an Inhabetant of their Towne, not- 
withstanding her residence at her fathers hous for the p'sent. 

On November 14, 1670, Timothy Tilston gave bond 
to the selectmen to save the town harmless from any 
damage and charges that might arise by reason of 
James Bridgman, his father-in-law, "Inhabiting in 
Dorchester or any of his while he or they remaine in 
Dorchester." 

In 1671 

Frances Bale was called before the Select men, and his fine 
demanded for Entertaining his Brother in law philhp Searle and 
his famely in his house without licence from the Select men, whose 
answer was that he was speedyly to remoue his dwelling to Rocks- 
be ry. 

The same day a warrant was Isued out to Constable Tilstone 
to giue notice vnto Henery Roberts for to depart the towne, who is 
now abiding at danil Ellens. 

The same day petter Lyon being caled before the Select men, 
and at that time desiered liberty for to entertaine peter Greene 
of Concord into his famely for one month which was granted him, 
p'uided he Cleer the towne of him at that time. 

On November 4, 1671, the record shows that a war- 
rant was directed 

to the Constable for to goe vp to Capt. Claps farme wher Henery 
Merrifeild doe lieue and to enquier whether his daughter which 



42 AVarning Out in New England 

marryed funnell be abiding at his lious, which if she be, then to 
demand or take by distress ten shillings for his entertaining her 
Contrary vnto the towne order. ^ 

On the eighth day of the next month 

the wife of Henery Merrifeild appeared before the Select men, 
to answer for entertaining of their daughter Funnell, Contrary 
to towne order, whose answer was, that she was their daughter 
and Could not turn her out of doars this winter time but she 
would willingly returne to her husband as soone as a passadg 
p'^sents; but they weer not approued in entertaining her, but the 
penalty of the town order the Select men would remitt and would 
leaue it to the County Court to determine the thing, if in Casse 
she be not gon before. 

In 1672 there is the following record: — 

The Select men haueing sent for John plum and his daughter 
Mercy, and finding that his said daughter being marryed to 
Thomas Chub of Beuerlee, and being alsoe neere the time of her 
deliuery is not p'uided for by her said husband, nor taken home to 
him, but continues heer with her father, contrary to good order, 
and to the hazarding of a charge vpon the towne, doe therfore 
order and requier, that the said Mercy Chub doe speedily within 
Six or eight days leaue this towne, and betake herself to her said 
husband. And doe also warne and order the said John Plum that 
he noe longer entertaine his said daughter, but hasten her to her 
husband as aforesaid vpon the penalty by the Town order in 
that Case p'uided, and of being complained of further to Au- 
thorety that soe the towne may be saued harmeless. 

In 1673 

John plum was called before the Select men to giue an ac- 
compt of his entertaining his Sonne Chub and his wife, whose an- 
swer was that his Sonne in law was gon and the Select men ordered 
him to discharge the towne of his daughter alsoe, forthwith. 

In November, 1677, the records show that 

Doctor Snellen of Boston Came to the Select men to obtaine 
libertie for to bring his wife and famely into this towne because 
of the pox increasing in Boston which libertie was granted him for 



Warning Out in New England 43 

two months but if he stayed longer to giue bond to secure the 
towne. 

In 1678 one John Brown was warned out of town, 
and appeared before the selectmen and said he 

thought that he might Come into town to be inliabetant becaus 
born in the town and that he might be an help to his father and 
mother, the Select men did Respit the full determination at that 
time to know the towns mind therin and in the meane time his 
warning out of towne to continue in force. 

On the ninth day of December, 1G79, the record 
shows that 

a warrant was sent to the Constables to take a fine of John Jack- 
son for fower weeks entertainement of Op'tunetie Lane Lane his 
daughter in law Contrary to towne order, and also to warne the 
said Opertunitie to dep* the towne or giue in securitie to secur 
the towne from damedg and also that if the said Jackson enter- 
taine her longer he must expect to pay 3''. 4^. p weeke for euery 
weeke after the date heerof : Shortly after the said Jackson came 
and he and William Cheney entered into 30'^ bond to secuer 
the towne. the bond is on file. 

In 1681 the record shows that one Joseph Weeks 

Came to the Select men and desiered libertie to take a nurst 
Child of one M"^ Steuens of Boston, Answer was returned that 
though the man may be sufficcient, yet becaus it may not be a 
p'^sedent vnto others he was ordered to appoint the man to giue 
something vnder his hand to some one of the Select men to secure 
the towne. 

In April, 1682, the record shows that it was 

agreed by the select men that a warrant should be sent to the Con- 
stable to require a penalty according to the towne order of those 
that did entertaine inmates without giueing bonds for the townes 
security. 

In Duxbury it was voted May 16, 1774, that the 
treasurer should prosecute all persons that might take 
in any persons or families belonging to any other 



44 Warning Out in New England 

town "as tenants, or servants, or friendship, or any 
straggling persons whatsoever into their houses or 
shelters," without giving the selectmen written notice 
of the names of such persons, and the places from 
whence they last came, within twenty days after they 
took them in.* 

In Plymouth none could come to inhabit without 
leave, and, if he did, was to be warned to go away 
under a penalty of five shillings a week. 

Inhabitants were forbidden to sell or to let houses 
or lands to persons not admitted as inhabitants. And 
no one was allowed to depart from his own town 
without leave of the governor and two magistrates 
under penalty of forfeiting all his personal property, f 

For instance, in one case it was ordered as follows: 

Whereas Mr. Thacher, Mr. Crowe, & Mr. Howes, the com- 
mittees of Yarmouth, were complayned of to haue made vnequall 
diusions of lands there, wherevpon the said comittees haue ex- 
hibited a very formall diusion of the said lands vnto the Court, 
w*^"^ is well approoued of, and the Court doth further order, that 
the said comittees shall receiue no more inhabitante into the said 
towne, except they bring certificate from the places whence they 
come, vnder sufficient mens hande of the sd place, of their relig- 
ious and honest carriage, w^'' certifycate shall first be allowed by 
the goun"^ and assistante before such psons be admitted there, t 

The following order from the records of the town of 
Plymouth is a sample of their orders with regard to 
strangers : — 

It is enacted by the Towne that noe houskeeper or other in this 
Towne Resideing in the Towne shall entertaine any stranger into 
theire houses above a fortnight without giveing Information to 
the Celect men or some one of them thereof upon the forfeiture 
of ten shillings a weeke for all such time as any such stranger shalbe 

* Winsor, History of Duxbury, p. 87. 

t Freeman, History of Cape Cod, Vol. I, pp. 297, 298. 

i Plymouth Colony Records, Vol. I (1633-16-tO), p. 142. 



Warning Out in New England 45 

soe entertained and stay without the said Information: To be 
levied on the estate of such house keepers or others that shall 
neglect to Informe as aforsaid: 

And incase the Celect men upon Information as aforsaid shall 
see cause to either take bonds for every such stranger either; to 
keep and save the Towne harmles from any damage that may 
acrew unto the Towne by the stay of such stranger or strangers 
in the Towne or expell them out of the Towne; The Celect men 
are heerby Impowered to doe either as they shall see Reason and 
cause.* 

To the Constables of the Town of Plimouth in the County of 
Plymouth, or Either of them Greeting. 

These are in his Majesty's Name to Will and Require you 
Forthwith To Warn & Give Notice to Zepheniah Doten and his 
Familly Who Came Into this Town the latter End of April Last 
or the beginning of May, From the Town of Plimton That They 
Immediately Depart This Town or else they may expect to be pro- 
ceeded Against According to Law, Also you are Alike Required to 
Warn & Give Notice to Reginald Mackreth a Stranger Who came 
From Liverpool In Nova Scotia into this Town in the Month of 
October Last that he Depart This Town Immediately or that 
otherwise be will be preceeded against according to Law. And 
you are alike Required to Warn & Give Notice to Abigail Waite 
Who came into this Town in the month of February Last from the 
Town of Hardwick In the County of Worcester that she Depart 
This Town Immediately otherwise She may Expect to be pro- 
ceeded Against according to Law. Hereof fail Not and make 
Return of this Warrant and your Doings Therein To the Select- 
men of Plymouth as Soon as May be. 

Plymouth April ye 11, 1764.t 

* Records of the Town of Plymouth, 1636-1705, Vol. I, p. 169. 
t Ibid., 1743-1783, Vol. Ill, pp. 152, 153. 



CHAPTER III. 

Massachusetts Colony and State Laws. — Plymouth Col- 
ony Laws. — Further Illustrations of Town Action 
AS TO Inhabitancy, Alienation of Land, Warning Out, 
etc. 

These proceedings of the Massachusetts and Plym- 
outh towns with regard to inhabitancy of new- 
comers were not only regarded as within the power of 
towns, as such, independent of any colony statute or 
order, but were recognized and required by colony 
laws prior to 1692. 

May 17, 1637, the General Court of the Massa- 
chusetts Colony passed the following order: — 

It is ordered, that no towiie or pson shall receive any stranger, 
resorting hither w*^ intent to reside in this iurisdiction, nor 
shall alow any lot or habitation to any, or intertaine any such 
above three weekes, except such pson shall have alowance vnder 
the hands of some one of the counsel!, or of two other of the 
magistrates, vpon paine that ev'^y towne that shall give or sell 
any lot or habitation to any such, not so alowed, shall forfet 
100s for every offence, & ev'^y pson receiving any such, for longer 
time than is heare expressed, (or then shalbe alowed in some 
speciall cases, as before, or in case of intertainement of freinds 
resorting from some other parts of this country for a convenient 
time,) shall forfet for evV offence 40s; and for ev'^y month after 
such pson shall there continew 20s; provided, that if any inhabi- 
tant shall not consent to the intertainment of any such person, 
& shall give notice thereof to any of the magistrates w* in one 
month after, such inhabitant shall not bee lyable to any part of 
this penulty.* 

In 1638 it was provided by the General Court that 
the constables of the several towns 

should informe of newe comers, if any bee admited w^'^out 
license; & to that end warrant to bee sent out to the cunstable 

* Massachusetts Colony Records, Vol. I, pp. 190, 241. 



Warning Out in New England 47 

of each towne, to informe the Court of Assistants, w''*' is to 
consider of the fines, whether to take them or to mitigate them. 

In June, 1650, another law to prevent strangers 
coming into the colony was passed as follows: — 

Whereas wee are credibly informed that great mischeifes and 
outrages have binn wrought in other plantac"ons in America by 
comanders, and souldjers of seuerall qualitjes, and other strain- 
gers issuing out of other parts, vsurping power of gounement ouer 
them, plundering of their estates, taking vp armes, and making 
great divisions amongst the inhabitants where they have come, 
to prevent the like mischeife in this jurisdiccon, this Court doth 
order, and it is heereby enacted, that henceforward all straingers, 
of what qualitje soeuer, above the age of sixteene yeeres, ariving 
heere in any portes or parts of this jurisdiccon in any shipp or 
vessell, shall imediately be brought before the Gouno^ Dep* 
Gouno"^, or two other magistrates, by the master or mate of 
the sajd shipps or vessells, vpon the poenalty of twenty pounds; 
for default thereof, there to give an accompt of their occasions 
and busines in this countrje, whereby satisfaccon may-be given 
to this comonwealth, and order taken w*** such straingers as the 
sajd Goun^ Depu* Gouno^ two Assistants, or the next Countje 
Court shall see meete; and that the lawe for intertajning of 
straingers be strictly putt in execution, and this order to be posted 
vp vpon the seuerall meetinghouses doores, or postes, or other 
publicke places in the port tounes of this jurisdiccon. And it 
is ordered, that the capt of the Castle shall make knoune this 
order to euery shippe or vessell as it passeth by, and the con- 
stables of euery port toune shall indeavor to doe the like to such 
shipps or vessells before they land their passengers; and that a 
true record be kept of all the names of such straingers, and their 
qualities, by the clarks of the writts, who shall have the names 
given them by the sajd Goun'^ or Magistrates, to be retourned to 
the next jmediate sessions of the Generall Court. This to 
continew and be in force till the next session.* 

It is said that this order, although general in its 
terms, was passed specially with reference to the fact 
that it was known that many of the friends of Wheel- 

* Records of Massachusetts Bay, 1650, 22 June (20), pp. 23, 24. 



48 Warning Out in New England 

Wright and persons who entertained the Antinomian 
heresy were about to arrive upon a ship from Eng- 
land.* 

But in October, 1651, another order, continuing it 
in force without Hmit of time, was made, as follows: — 

Whereas there was a law made in the yeere 1650, concerning 
straungers coming into this jurisdiction, wherein all straungers 
ariving within any of our port tonnes, above the age of sixteene 
yeres, were enjoyned to be accomptable before the Gouernor, 
Dep* Gouernor, or two of the honnored magistrates of the occa- 
sion of their coming into these parts, as in that order more largely 
doth appeare, which sajd order is long since expired, itt is there- 
fore heereby ordered, that the sajd lawe be againe revived, and 
declared by this Courte to stand in force till this Court shall see 
just cawse to repeale the same.f 

In 1655 complaint was made to the General Court 
that strangers came into town without the consent 
of the inhabitants, and caused charges to the town 
for their support, and an order was passed providing 
that persons who should be brought into the town 
without the consent of the "prudential men" — that 
is, the selectmen — should not be chargeable for their 
support to the town, but to those who were the cause 
of their coming in, as follows: — 

All townes in this jurisdiction shall haue libertie to pvent 
the coming in of such as come from other parts or places of theise 
jurisdictions, & that all such psons as shalbe brought into any 
such towne without the consent & allowance of the prudentiall 
men, shall not be chargeable to the townes where they dwell, 
but, if necessitie require, shalbe releiued & mayntayned by those 
that were the cause of their coming in, of whom y*^ towne or 
select men are hereby empowred to require securitie at their 
entrance, or else forbid them entertaynment.J 

* Winthrop, Vol. I, p. 267. 

t Records of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. IV, Part I, p. 63. 

t Ibid., p. 230. 



Warning Out in New England 49 

In May, 1659, the following order was passed: — 

For the avoyding of all future inconvenjencjes referring to 
the setling of poore people that may neede releife from the place 
where they dwell, itt is ordered by this Court and the authoritje 
thereof, that where any person, w*'*' his family, or in case he hath 
no family, shall be resident in any toune or peculjar* of this 
jurisdiccon for more then three moneths w^'^out notice given to- 
such person or persons by the constable, or one of the select- 
men of the sajd place, or theire order, that the toune is not will- 
ing that they should remajne as an inhabitant amongst them, 
and in case, after such notice given, such person or persons shall, 
notw*^standing remajne in the sajd place, if the selectmen of the 
sajd place shall not, by way of complaint, petition the next 
County Court of that shiere for releife in the sajd case, & the same 
prosecuted to effect, euery such person or persons (as the case 
may require) shall be provided for & releived, in case of necessity, 
by the inhabitants of the sajd place where he or she is so found, f 

When the Massachusetts, Plymouth, and Connecti- 
cut Colonies confederated under Articles of Confedera- 
tion for mutual defence in 1672, the right of towns to 
warn strangers to depart was expressly recognized 
by Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation, as 
follows : — 

13. It is alsoe agreed for settleing of vagabonds and wander- 
ing persons remoueing from one Collonie to another to the disatis- 
faction and burthen of the places where they come as dayly expe- 
rience sheweth vs; for the future it is ordered, "that wher any 
person or persons shalbe found in any ^Jurisdiction to haue had 
theire abode for more than three monthes and not warned out by 
the authoritie of the place; and incase of the neglect of any person 
soe warned as abouesaid to depart; if hee be not by the first 
oppertunitie that the season will permitt sent away from Con- 
stable to Constable; to the end that hee may be returned to the 
place of his former aboad; euery such person or persons shalbe 

*A "peculiar" is a village or a new settlement within the territory of a 
town, as Muddy River (Brookline). 

In English law a parish which has jurisdiction of ecclesiastical matters, 
t Records of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. IV, Part I, p. 365. 



50 Warning Out in New England 



^ wen. lii x-,v.,v -1^1151 



accoumpted an Inhabitant where they are soe found, and by 
them gouerned and provided for as theire condition may require 
and in all such cases the Charge of the Constables to be bourne 
by the Treasurer where the said Constables doe dwell.* 

This order, it will be observed, recognizes the right 
of the towns to notify persons coming into the place 
that they are not willing the persons should remain 
as inhabitants; that is, to warn them out of the town. 
In 1675 the Indian wars forced many people to leave 
their homes and go to other places, and, to prevent 
such persons from becoming chargeable to the towns 
into which they were obliged to go, the General Court 
passed an order providing that such persons should 
not, by virtue of their residence in the towns to which 
they went, become inhabitants thereof, or the towns 
become chargeable for their support, as follows: — 

This court considering the inconvenience and damage which 
may arise to particular towns by such as, being forced from their 
habitations through the present calamity of the war, do repair 
unto them for succour: Do order and declare, that such persons, 
being inhabitants of this jurisdiction, who are so forced from their 
habitations and repair to other plantations for relief, shall not by 
virtue of their residence in said plantations they repair unto be 
accounted or reputed inhabitants thereof, or imposed upon them 
according to law, tit. Poor, but in such case, and where neces- 
sity requires, by reason of inability of relations &c. they shall be 
supplied out of the publick treasury; and that the selectmen of 
each town inspect this matter, and do likewise provide that such 
men or women may be so employed and children disposed of, 
that as much as may be publick charge may be avoided. (July, 
1675.) t 

This order recognized colony poor to be supported 
at the general public charge. 

* " Articles of Confederation between the Plantations under the Gouerment 
of the Massachusetts; The Plantations under the Gouernment of New Plym- 
outh; and the Plantations under the Gouerment of Conecticott; Article 13. 
September the fift, 1G72." Hazard, Vol. II, p. 525. 

t Massachusetts Colony Ancient Laws and Charters, Chap. LXXV^. 



Warning Out in New England 51 

The increase of population and the desire of persons 
to move from one place to another in the colony, 
however, began to make it practically impossible to 
enforce the right of towns to exclude new-comers from 
inhabitancy by physically preventing them from com- 
ing in, or removing them, if they did come into the 
town. New persons came into the different towns 
and resided therein, and they were entertained, not- 
withstanding the laws against it, so that the towns 
became liable to the support of persons whom they 
did not actually admit by vote of the inhabitants or 
action of the town authorities. 

In this state of affairs, relief was given to the towns 
by legislation, authorizing them to warn new-comers 
to depart from the towns, and providing that, if they 
were so warned, their subsequent living in the town 
should not make them inhabitants entitled to sup- 
port in case of poverty. 

In November, 1692, an act was passed specially 
providing for warning persons who might come into 
a town to leave it, and for a record of the names of 
such persons, and a warning to them in court, as 
follows: — 

If any person or persons come to sojourn or dwell in any 
town and be there received and entertained by the space of three 
months, not having been warned by the constable, or other per- 
son whom the selectmen shall appoint for that purpose, to leave 
the place, and the names of such persons with the time of their 
abode there and when such warning was given them returned 
into Court of quarter sessions, every such person shall be deemed 
an inhabitant of such town and the proper charge of the same in 
case through sickness, lameness, or otherwise, they come to stand 
in need of relief to be borne by such town. Unless relatives be of 
sufficient ability to do so &c.* 

* Massachusetts Province Laws, State edition, Vol. I, p. 67. 



52 Warning Out in New England 

March 14, 1700, a further act was passed with 
regard to the admission of inhabitants into towns, 
which recognized the method of warning out as well 
established. Section 5 of that Act provided that no 
town shall "be chargeable with the support of any 
person residing therein who has not been approved 
as an inhabitant by the town or the selectmen" as in 
the Act provided, unless they had "continued their 
residence there by the space of twelve months next 
before and not been warned in manner as the law 
directs to depart and leave the town, any law, usage 
or custom to the contrary notwithstanding." 

Section 6 provided that if any person not an inhabi- 
tant, "orderly warned to depart" and sent by warrant 
of a justice of the peace to the town where he properly 
belonged or to the place of his last abode, should come 
back to the town from which he had been warned and 
sent, he should be proceeded against as a vagabond.* 

January 5, 1739, an Act was passed declaring the 
meaning of the Act of 1700, and that no taxing of 
any person not admitted as an inhabitant by the town 
or the selectmen should make the town chargeable 
for the support of that person, and that no forbear- 
ance of the selectmen to "warn the person to depart 
the town" should relieve the person by whom such 
person was received from the charge of his support, 
etc.f 

February 11, 1793, an Act was passed repealing all 
laws as to town settlements and providing how settle- 
ments should be thereafter gained,! and with this 
went all provisions for warning out of town, and no 
such warning has since existed in Massachusetts. 

* Massachusetts Province Laws. State edition. Vol. I, p. 453. 

t Ibid., p. 995, 

I Laws and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1793, Chap. 34. 



Warning Out in New England 53 

It is interesting to note, however, that the original 
theory of inhabitancy by consent of the town was 
preserved in this statute. Among the eight different 
methods by which it was provided that legal settle- 
ments could be obtained was this: — 

Any person that shall be admitted an inhabitant by any 
town or district at any legal meeting, in the warrant for which 
an article shall be inserted for that purpose, shall thereby gain 
a legal settlement therein. 

This provision was retained in the law of the Com- 
monwealth in the revision of the statutes in 1836,* 
and in the revision in 1860,t and only disappeared 
in the revision of 1882. 

The Act of 1793 also had another provision that 

All settled, ordained Ministers of the Gospel shall be deemed 
as legally settled in the towns or districts wherein they are or 
may be settled and ordained. 

This provision has been continued until the present 
time, and now exists as follows: — 

A settled, ordained minister of the gospel shall acquire a settle- 
ment in the place wherein he is settled. J 

In the Colony of New Plymouth it was enacted in 
1636 

That noe person or persons hereafter shall be admitted to 
live and inhabite within the Government of New Plymouth 
without the leave and likeinge of the Governour or two of the 
Assistants at least. 

In 1658 another order was passed reciting the order 
of 1636, as follows:— 

Whereas it hath bine an ancient and wholesome order bearing 
date March the seventh 1636 that noe pson coming from other 

* Revised Statutes, Chap. 45, Sect. 1. 
t General Statutes, Chap. 69, Sect. 1. 
I Revised Laws of Massachusetts, Chap. 80, Sect. 1. 



54 Warning Out in New England 

ptes bee alowed an Inhabitant of this Jurisdiction but by the 
approbacon of the Gov"^ and two of the Majist rates att least and 
that many persons contrary to this order of Court are crept 
into some townshipes of this Jurisdiction which are and may bee 
a great desturbance of our more peacable proceedings, bee it 
enacted by the Court and the autlioritie thereof that if any such 
pson or psons shalbee found that hath not doth not or will not 
apply and approve themselves soe as to procure the approbacon 
of the Gov'^ and two of the Assistants that such bee inquired 
after, and if any such psons shalbee found that either they de- 
part the Gov'^ment or else that the Court take some such course 
therin as shalbee thought meet.* 

In the compilation of Plymouth Laws in 1671, it 
was provided 

That no person shall come into any Town or Peculiar in this 
Government to live and inhabitant, without the leave and appro- 
bation of the Governour and two of the Assistants at the least. 

It was then provided that "every Town in this 
Government shall maintain their own poor," and also 

That if any person come to live in any Town in this Govern- 
ment, and be there received .'.nd entertained three months, if 
by sickness, lameness or the like, he comes to want relief, he shall 
be provided for by that Town wherein he was so long entertained, 
and shall be reputed their proper charge, unless such person 
have within the said three months been warned by the Constable, 
or some one or more of the Select men of that Town, not there 
to abide without leave first obtained of the Town, and certifie 
the same to the next Court of Assistants, who shall otherwise 
order the person or charge arising about him, according to justice. 

But if any children or elder persons shall be sent, or come 
from one Town to another, to be nursed, schooled, or otherwise 
Educated, or to a Physitian or Chyrurgeon to be cured of any 
disease or wound, &c. if such come to stand in need of relief, 
they shall be relieved and maintained by the Township whence 
they came, and not by that Township where they are so nursed, 
educated or at cure; And in case they come or be sent from any 
place out of this Colony; then if the Nurse, Educator, Physi- 
* Compact, Charter and Laws of Colony of New Plymouth, pp. 57, 119. 



Warning Out in New England 55 

tion or Chyrurgeon do not take good security to discharge the 
Town wherein he lives from all cost and charge, which shall or 
may befal concerning them, he that so received them shall be the 
Towns security in their behalf,* 

Warning out was practised generally by the Massa- 
chusetts and Plymouth towns under this legislation 
down to the Act of Settlement of 1793. 

In some towns it appears to have been practised 
with discrimination; that is, only such persons were 
warned to depart as the town authorities thought 
were likely to become in need of support. In other 
cases, however, it was apparently the practice to 
warn out all new-comers, whether thought likely to 
become chargeable or not. 

The result of this was that a large number of persons 
became actual inhabitants of towns, owned property, 
paid taxes, held town offices, bore all the burdens and 
performed all the duties of citizenship, without ever 
acquiring the right of inhabitancy; that is, of support 
in case they or their children became in need of sup- 
port. This fact and the uncertainty which arose in 
many such cases as to where the proper inhabitancy 
or settlement of persons who became in need of sup- 
port was, led to the enactment of the General Law of 
Settlement of 1793. 

The action of the Massachusetts towns in this 
matter is further illustrated by the following in- 
stances : — 

In Marshfield in 1664 the town gave authority 
to the selectmen to warn idle or disorderly persons 
out of town, and the inhabitants were forbidden to 
entertain any person that had been so warned. f 

* Compact, Charter and Laws of Colony of New Plymouth (edition 1836) 
p. 274. 

t Richards, History of Marshfield, p. 48. 



56 Warning Out in New England 

The records of Deerfield, May 11, 1664, show this 
notification : — 

To the Selectmen of Deerfield: Gentlemen; This is to give 
Notice to you that there came to my House April 29th, 1664 Zebu- 
len Tubbs his wife Esther Tubbs & two Children viz. Theuel 
& Esther where they now are. They came last from Hinsdale 
in the Province of New Hampshire their circumstances being some- 
thing low in worldly things having no other estate that I know 
of but one Horse & two Cows. 

John Henry. 
A true Copy of ye Notification 

Att^' Tho^ Williams T. Cler. 

The forms of warning out used in Lancaster, Mas- 
sachusetts, in 1671, show plainly that the warning 
out then practised was of such persons as were likely 
to become chargeable to the town.* 

In this town, however, in 1791 the selectmen caused 
more than a hundred persons, men and women with 
their children, to be warned to depart out of the town 
without regard to their character or pecuniary con- 
dition. Among others thus treated was the Hon. John 
Sprague, who had been in town about twenty years, 
and had already represented the town in the General 
Court four years. 

In 1679 the inhabitants of Salem were summoned 
to answer for permitting persons not inhabitants to 
abide in their houses. In 1679 two persons were au- 
thorized 

to take an account of all inmates or strangers, that are now in or 
may hereafter come into the towne and returne their names to 
the selectmen every moneth, and, if need be, to warne them to 
depart. 

In 1695 a "jersyman" (evidently a man from New 
Jersey) who had served six years in Salem was " warned " 

* Nourse, Annals of Lancaster, p. 89. 



Warning Out in New England 57 

away. Such notices were frequent for twenty-five 
years after that time. Felt says that in 1790 and 
1791 there were several hundred people in Salem not 
regular inhabitants who were warned to depart.* 

In Reading in 1691 the record shows that three 
persons "were warned out of town." And this was 
done for many years thereafter, but confined, as it is 
said, to such new-comers as, in the opinion of the 
town, were likely to become a town charge. f 

In Attleboro it was voted in 1697 that 

No person that is a stranger shall be received as an inhabitant 
without the consent or approbation of said Town, or sufficient 
security given to the Town by him or them that shall take in or 
harbor any person contrary to this order; — moreover the Select- 
men are appointed to take due care and sufficient security in the 
behalf of the Town of and for all such persons as shall receive in 
or harbor any stranger or foriner, or to give order and warning to 
such stranger or foriner to depart the town according as the law 
directs, and that with all convenient speed after knowledge or 
notice given of the same.J 

In Medford it was the custom to warn every new- 
comer out of town, and record the notification in the 
Court of Sessions as a "caution" up to the time of the 
Revolution. § 

The inhabitants of Sudbury repeatedly used the 
power of warning out strangers and of censuring and 
fining inhabitants who received strangers into their 
houses. They also ordered that no inhabitant should 
let or lease any houses or lands unto strangers without 
leave of the selectmen in a selectmen's meeting, or 
leave given in a general town meeting, unless they 
should "stake-down, depositate and bind over a suffi- 

♦ Felt. A7inals of Salem., Vol. I, pp. 358, 359, 360. 

t Eaton, History of Reading, p. 36. 

t Daggett, History of Attleboro, p. 88. 

§ Usher, History of Medford, p. 111. 



58 Warning Out in New England 

cient estate to the selectmen to save the town harmless 
from any charge that should come thereby." 

They further provided that any violation of this 
order should be punished by a fine of nineteen shil- 
lings sixpence for each week's residence of the stranger, 
to be paid to the town.* 

The records of Wenham show numerous instances 
of warning out, mostly soon after the Revolutionary 
War. One return upon a warrant reads: "I have 
warned said Margaret Poland, widow, to depart and 
leave the town, and Samuel Patch that he dont en- 
tertain her."t 

In Canton the town warned out all new-comers, 
and made it the duty of all heads of families to in- 
form the selectmen immediately of the name, age, 
occupation, and previous residence of the new-comer. 
One of these notifications in 1734 said of the new- 
comer, — 

The Selectmen are informed that he has several hundred acres 
of land in Connecticut, but that a glass of good liquor stands a 
very narrow chance when it lies in his way. J 

In Dudley there is this record: — 

To EITHER OF THE CONSTABLES OF THE TOWN OF DuDLEY 

IN THE County of Worcester, Greeting: 

Whereas, Martha MacKentiah of and belonging to Reading 
North precinct in the County of Essex has lately come into the 
sd town of Dudley with a child about two years old and the sd 
Martha being poor and in indigent circumstances may, if she be 
allowed to continue in sd town, become a charge to it — you are 
therefore hereby directed forthwith to warn the sd Martha Mac- 
Kentiah, to depart with her child in the space of fourteen days, 
as she will answer the neglect at the peril of the law in that cause 

* Hudson, History of Sudbury, pp. 138, 139. 

t Allen, History of Wenham, p. 61. 

t Huntoon, History of Canton, pp. 251, 252. 



Warning Out in New England 59 

made and provided given under our hands at Dudley the second 
day of August, Anno Domini, 1735.* 

In Newbury the colony law with regard to the en- 
tertainment of strangers in towns was enforced by 
warning out and the imposition of penalties. War- 
rants were granted and served, warning new-comers 
out of town, and as late as 1734 the records of the 
selectmen show the payment to them of fines of 
forty shillings in each case for taking in "a tenant 
and not informing the Town's Clerk nor Selectmen of 
the Town of his so doing. "f 

In Lynn the practice prevailed for many years of 
warning out of the town by a warrant issued by 
the selectmen to every individual, rich or poor, who 
came into it. An amusing incident is related in the 
history of the town, arising under these orders. One 
elderly gentleman who had just arrived in town was 
served with an order to depart, and took it for a 
real intimation that they did not desire him to remain, 
and he said to his wife: "Come, wife, we must pack 
up. But there — we have one consolation for it, it is 
not so desirable a place. "J 

In Tewksbury there was a case where a person, 
presumably a constable, appears to have warned him- 
self out of town. The record shows this entry: — 

To Daniel Pryor 18/, it being for warning himself and fam- 
ily and Mrs. Mahoney and her child, out of town.§ 

The returns of warnings out from the different towns 
in Worcester County from 1737 to 1788, on the records 
of the Court, show that G,764 persons were thus warned 

* The Settlement of Dudley. By Samuel Morris Conant. Quinabaug Histori- 
cal Society leaflets, No. 8, p. 105. 

t Currier, History of Newbury, Mass., pp. 216, 217. 

J Lewis and Newhall, History of Lynn, p. 297. 

§ Edward W. Pride, In Tewksbury: A Short History, p. 53. 



60 Warning Out in New England 

out from forty different towns during that period. In 
some of the towns, it is said, a hirge proportion of the 
inhabitants appear in the Hst of persons warned, and 
many of them became prominent citizens in the 
towns. 

The wording of the returns of the warrants, as 
recorded, is not uniform. The following are given 
as examples merely: — 

Sturbridge Caution — against Sam' Child, an old man now 
dwelling at the house of Moses Marcy Esq. Warrant dated 
Oct. 7. 

The Selectmen of the Town of Sutton in said County are al- 
lowed to Enter their Caution against Kezia man the Selectmen 
refusing to admit her Inhabitant of said Town she having been 
duely warned thereout as by a Warrant under the Hands & Seal 
of the said Selectmen. Dated y^ 23rd of December Last & Con- 
stables return thereon on file appears.* 

In Haverhill it was customary to warn nearly all 
the new-comers to depart out of the town.f 

In Lexington new-comers were warned out as early 
as 1714. The learned historian of the town, Charles 
Hudson, states the practice as follows: — 

When any family or single person, even to a domestic in a 
family, came into town, the head of the family, or person owning 
the premises, was required to give notice to the selectmen of the 
names and numbers of the new comers, the place whence they 
came, the date of their coming into town, and their pecuniary 
condition. If the selectmen thought there was danger of their 
becoming a public charge, they caused them to be warned to 
leave the town, and to have a caution, as it was termed, entered 
with the Court of Sessions. This matter appears on our records 
as early as 1714, when "Capt. Joseph Estabrook was authorized 
to request the Honorable Court of Sessions in June next, to 
enter cautions against Daniel Cutting and his wife, Sarah Cook, 
and Johanna Snow, that they might not be burthensome to Lex- 

* Blake, Worcester County Warnings, 1899. 
t History of Haverhill, p. 229. 



Warning Out in New England 61 

ington." In 1722, Daniel Roff with his family were ordered to 
depart out of Lexington. We will add a few specimens of these 
notices : — 

Lexington, Jan. G, 17G1. 

To the Selectmen. Gentlemen: These are to inform you that 
on the 19th of December last past, I took widow Elizabeth Samp- 
son, as a housekeeper, from Harvard, that being her last place of 
residence; she being under good circumstances. 

John Bridge. 
To the Selectment of the Town of Lexington. 

Gent: These are to inform you that I have received into 
my house to reside wuth me, Abigail Stone, on or about ye 12th 
of May. Her last place of residence, Woburn. Her circum- 
stances I believe are low. James Robbins. 

May 29, 1762. 

At December Court, 1760, Caution was entered against 
Edmand Dix, Hannah Stockbridge, Ann Hodge, and Hannah 
Ross, as the law directs. 

Widow Abigail Whittemore informs — that on the 26th day 
of December, 1755, she took into her house as inmates her son- 
in-law, Nathaniel Whittemore, with his wife and child, under 
poor circumstances. They came from Lincoln. She informed, 
Jan. 5, 1756. 

At a meeting of the Selectmen, Aug. 27, 1744, Allowed Con- 
stable Daniel Brown, 3 shillings for warning Richard Hutchinson 
out of town. 

Also ordered the Clerk to draw a warrant and give it to the 
Constable to warn Archable Mackintosh and his family, forth- 
with to depart out of Lexington. 

These examples, which are taken promiscuously from the 
records, show the manner in which business was done at that 
time, and the general supervision which the authorities took of 
public, or as some might say, private affairs. It seems by the 
examples that a gentleman could not hire a man to live with him, 
or a girl to work in his family, or allow a tenant to occupy his 
house, or a house under his care, without giving notice thereof to 
the selectmen. And it is worthy of remark that these notices 
have been given of the incoming of certain individuals, who 
have afterwards become some of the most respectable and in- 



62 Warning Out in New England 

fluential men in the town. Some of the young women whose 
ingress into town was thus pubUcly heralded, won the hearts of 
some of the permanent residents, and became the mothers of some 
of Lexington's most honored citizens. And when the calls of our 
country required the services of her patriotic sons, several of the 
very men who had been "warned out of town," were among 
the first to obey the call.* 

In Bridgewater it was the custom much in use to 
warn out all persons moving into town. The notice was 
served by a constable, usually in the following form : — 

By virtue of a warrant from the Selectmen of the town of 
Bridgewater you are requested to depart the limits of said town 
within fifteen days, you never having obtained leave of inhabit- 
ing the same.f 

November 25, 1789. 

In Oxford, beginning in 1789, when the town had 
become poor and the number of indigent persons had 
increased in consequence of the Revolution, the custom 
of warning out was adopted with reference to all new- 
comers. In December, 1789, a man and his family 
and "a spinster" from other towns were warned to 
leave town, "they having come for the purpose of 
abiding therein not having obtained the town's con- 
sent therefor." 

In February, 1792,78 persons were warned out of town; 
in the following June, 23; and December, 1793, 42.{ 

In Greenfield, beginning about 1790, warning out 
was quite generally practised, and the town records 
show that the ancestors of very well-known families 
at present time were warned to depart, but remained. 

The same practice was followed in Bernardston, 
where in 1790 eight men "coming from Greenfield" 
were warned to depart out of town. 

* Hudson, History of Lexington, p. 80. 

t Kingman, History of North Bridgewater, p. 346. 

X Daniels, History of Oxford, p. 7G9. 



CHAPTER IV. 

Inhabitancy and Warning Out in Connecticut. — Early 
Colony and State Laws. — Illustrations of Action of 
Towns, etc. 

In no part of New England was the admission of 
inhabitants, transfer of land, and warning out of per- 
sons w^ho sought to be inhabitants without being ad- 
mitted by the towns more carefully guarded than in 
Connecticut. The early laws passed by the General 
Court for the Colony were very strict and specific with 
regard to these matters. By subsequent additions to 
and amendments of these early statutes the Connect- 
icut Code of Laws with regard to admission of in- 
habitants, liability of support for those admitted, and 
with regard to removing persons who came into towns 
without being admitted, was more elaborate, compli- 
cated, and severe, than that of any other New Eng- 
land Colony or State. For this reason and because 
these early laws are not easily accessible I have 
thought it best to reproduce these statutes at length, 
although some of the provisions contained in them 
may not be of particular importance as bearing upon 
the matter of warning out.* 

The admission of inhabitants was carefully pro- 
vided for by the "Fundamentals," so called, adopted 
at Hartford, January 14, 1638. The first one of these 
provided that the choice of officers 

* The early laws of Connecticut were compiled and printed in 1702, but 
only two complete copies are now known to exist. From one of these copies 
the Acorn Society of Hartford published a reprint in 1901, in an edition of one 
hundred copies. It is from this reprint that the citations are here made. 



64 Warning Out in New England 

shall be made by all that are admitted freemen and haue taken 
the Oath of Fidelity, and doe cohabitte w*''in this Jurisdiction, 
(hauing beene admitted Inhabitants by the maior p'^t of the 
Towne wherein they Hue,) or the mayor p'^te of such as shall be 
then p'^sent. 

The words in parentheses are not in the original 
record, but were interlined in a different handwriting 
at a later period. Presumably this was done after 
1643, for we find this record on November 10, 1643: — 

Whereas in the fundamentall Order yt is said (that such who 
haue taken the Oath of fidellity and are admitted inhabitants) 
shall be alowed as quallified for chuseing of Deputyes, The Court 
declares their judgement, that such only shall be counted ad- 
mitted inhabitants, who are admitted by a generall voate of the 
mayor p'^te of the Towne that receaueth them.* 

Again at a joint Court f on February 26, 1656, the 
qualifications of inhabitants were stated by the fol- 
lowing order: — 

This Court doth order, that by admitted inhabitants, specified 
in the 7*''^ Fundamentall, are meant only housholders that are 
one & twenty yeares of age, or haue bore office, or haue 301. estate. 

The 7th Fundamental here referred to was the one 
providing for the choice of deputies by all that were 
admitted inhabitants in the several towns. { 

May 17, 1660, it was ordered by the General Court 
that 

None shalbe receaued as Inhabitant into any Towne in the 
CoUony but such as are knowne to be of an honest conversation, 
and accepted by a maior part of the Towne. 

It is alsoe ordered, that noe Inhabitant shall haue power to 

* Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, Vol. I, pp. 21, 96. 
t "The magistrates and deputies then met together and acted jointly as one 
body. They first acted as two bodies in October, 1698." Trumbull, p. 399, 
t Ibid., p. 293. 



Warning Out in New England 65 

make sale of his assomodat" of house and lands vntil he haue 
first propounded the sale thereof to y'' Towne where it is situate 
and they refuse to accept of y® sale tendred.* 

In the laws of 1673 it was provided that every town 
should maintain their own poor, and also that 

If any person come to live in any Town in this Government, 
and be there received and entertained three months, if by sick- 
ness, lameness or the like, he comes to want relief e; he shall be 
provided for by that Town wherin he was so long entertained, 
and shall be reputed their proper charge, unless such person have 
within the said three months been warned by the Constable, or 
some one or more of the Select men of that Town, not there to 
abide without leave first obtained of the Town, and certifie the 
same to the next Court of Assistants, who shall othersise Order 
the charge arising about him according to Justice.! 

By the laws of 1702 it was 

Ordered and enacted That no inhabitant in this Colony, 
shall have power to make sale of his Accomodations, of House 
or Lands, to any but the Inhabitants of the Township wherein 
the said House and Lands is Scituate, without the consent of 
the Town, and unless he have first propounded the Sale thereof, 
to the Town, where it is Scituate and they refuse the Sale tendred, 
or to give so much as another Chapman will.| 

It was also provided that 

Whereas several persons of an Ungoverned Conversation, 
thrust themselves into our Townships, and by some under 
hand way, as either upon pretence of being hired Servants, or 
of hiring Lands or Houses, become inhabitants in our Townships, 
whereby much Inconveniency doth arise to such places, such 
persons often proving vicious, chargeable and burthensome to 
the places where they come: which to prevent. 

It is enacted and ordained That no person shall be received 
an Inhabitant into any Town in this Colony, but such as are 

♦Trumbull, p. 351. 

t The Laws of Connecticut, 1673, p, 57. 

I Acts and Laws of Colony of Connecticut, 1702, p. 53. 



CG Warning Out in New England 

known to be of an honest Conversation, and accepted by the 
major part of the Town. 

And that no transient person shall be allowed to Reside, and 
make his or her abode in any Township in this Colony, (Appren- 
tices under age, and Servants bought for time excepted) upon 
pretence of Hiring, or being Hired, or Tennantship or Inmates, 
without the approbation of the Authority, and Select-men of 
such Town. 

And if any person or persons shall contrary to the intent of 
this Act, entertain or hire any stranger or transient person, or 
Lett any House or Land to such stranger or transient person, 
except he or they shall first give good security to the acceptance 
of the said Authority, and Select-men, that such Town or Plan- 
tation shall not be burthened and charged by him or them, he 
shall forfeit and pay to the use of the poor of the Town whereto 
he or they belong, the Sum of Twenty Shillings per Week, for 
every Week, he shall harbour, entertain, or hire any such person. 

And it is further enacted and ordained That the Civil 
Authority, when and so often as there shall be occasion in any 
Town or Plantation in this Colony, shall be, and are hereby 
Impowered to order any vagrant or suspected person or persons, 
to be sent back from Constable to Constable, to the place or 
places from whence he or they came; unless such person or per- 
sons can produce good Certificate, that he or they are persons of 
good behaviour, free from all ingagements, and at liberty to 
remove themselves as he or they shall see meet: and if such per- 
son shall return after they are sent back as aforesaid, and abide 
and continue in said Town after warning given them to depart, 
they shall be severely Whipt, not exceeding Ten Stripes.* 

And it was further 

Enacted, That if any person or persons shall come to live in 
any Town in this Colony, and be there received and entertained 
by the space of three months, and if by Sickness, lameness, or the 
like, he or they come to want relief, every such person or persons 
shall be provided for by that Town wherein he or they was so long 
entertained, at their own proper charge; unless such person or 
persons have within the said three months, been warned by the 
Constable, or some one or more of the Select-men of that Town, 

* Acts and Laws of Colony of Connecticut, 1702, p. 58. 



Warning Out in New England 67 

to depart and leave the place: which if the said Constable, or any 
one or more of the Select-men shall do, and thereof certifie the 
next Court of Assistants to be held in this Colony, the said Court 
of Assistants shall and may otherwise order the defraying of the 
Charge arising about such person or persons.* 

In 1750 it was provided that 

If any Person, or Persons shall come to Live in any Town 
in this Colony, and be there Received, and Entertained by the 
space of Three Months: and if by Sickness, Lameness, or the like, 
he, or they come to want Relief, every such Person, or Persons 
shall be Provided for by that Town wherein he, or they were so 
long Entertained, at said Towns own proper Cost, and Charge; 
Unless such Person, or Persons by Law are to be provided for by 
any particular Inhabitant of such Town: Or unless such Person, 
or Persons wanting Relief have within the said Three Months 
been Warned as the Law directs, to Depart, and Leave the Place: 
And if such Warning be given, and the same be Certified to the 
next Superiour Court to be held in the same County, the said 
Court shall, and may otherwise Order the Defraying the Charge 
arising about such Indigent Person, or Persons, f 

In 1769 an Act for the admission of inhabitants in 
towns, and for the preventing of charge on account 
of such as are not admitted therein, was passed as 
follows : — 

Whereas several Persons of ungoverned Conversation, thrust 
themselves into the Towns in this Colony, and by some under- 
hand Way, as upon pretence of being hired Servants; or of hir- 
ing Lands or Houses; or by purchasing the same, endeavour to 
become Inhabitants in such Towns. 

And whereas Persons are sometimes Entertained, and set to 
Work by those who live in the Skirts and obscure Places of said 
Towns, out of the View and Observation of the Officers of the 
Town, whereby much Inconvenience doth arise; such Persons 
often proving Vicious, and Chargeable and Burthensome to the 
Places where they come. 

* Acts and Laws of Colony of Connecticut, 1702, p. 95. 

t Acts and Laws of Connecticut in New-England in America, 1750, p. 191. 



68 Warning Out in New England 

Which to prevent: 

Be it Enacted by the Governour, Council and Representatives, in. 
General Court assembled, and by the Authority of the same, That 
no Person shall be received or admitted an Inhabitant in any Town 
in this Colony, but such as are known to be of an honest Con- 
versation, and shall be accepted by the major Part of the Town; 
or by the Authority in, and Select-men of the Town. 

That no Stranger or transient Person shall be allowed to re- 
side, and make his or her Abode in any Town in this Colony, (Ap- 
prentices under Age, and Servants bought for Time excepted) 
upon pretence of hiring, of being hired, or of Tenantship, or In- 
mates, without the approbation of the Authority in, and the 
Select-men of such Town. 

And the more effectually to prevent Persons from making their 
Abode in any Town contrary to this Act. 

Be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid. That if any 
Person or Persons shall contrary to the intent of this Act, en- 
tertain or hire any Stranger or transient Person; or Let any 
House or Land to such Stranger or transient Person; except he 
or they shall first give Security to the acceptance of the said Au- 
thority and Select-men, that such Town shall not be Burthened 
and Charged by him or them, (which Security such Authority 
and Selectmen may take or refuse at their Discretion) he or they 
so entertaining or hiring or Letting any House or Land to such 
Stranger, or transient Person, shall forfeit and pay to the Treas- 
urer of the Town whereto he or they belong, the Sum of Ten Shil- 
lings per Week, for every Week he or they shall Harbour, Enter- 
tain, Hire, or Let such Estate to such Person. 

And if any such Stranger, or transient Person, shall contrary 
to the intent of this Act, make his or her Abode within any Town 
in this Colony, every such Person shall forfeit and pay to such 
Treasurer Ten Shillings per Week for every Week that he or she 
shall continue in such Town after warning given to him or her, by 
Order of the Select-men of said Town; or upon their Request, by 
Warrant from Authority to Depart such Town, (which Warning 
the said Select-men are Impowred to order, or give: And the said 
Authority, on Request, as aforesaid, is Impowred to issue a War- 
rant to the Constable, to warn such Persons to Depart as aforesaid.) 

And when it shall so happen that any such Stranger, or tran- 
sient Person, who shall be Convicted of the Breach of this Act, 



Warning Out in New England 69 

and hath not Estate to satisfy the Fine, such Person shall be 
Whipped upon the naked Body, not exceeding Ten Stripes; unless 
he or she Depart the Town within Ten Days next after Sentence 
given, and reside no more therein without Leave of the Select- 
men. 

Any one Assistant, or Justice of the Peace to hear and deter- 
mine the Breach of this Act. 

Provided nevertheless. That if such Stranger, or transient Per- 
son hath continued in any Town for the space of One Year before 
such Warning given, or shall continue in such Town One Year 
after such Warning, and be not in that Time prosecuted for Breach 
of this Act, then it shall not be Lawful to proceed against, or 
prosecute any such Person by Virtue of this Act, for continuing 
in such Town contrary to the same ; but such Person may continue 
in such Town this Act notwithstanding. 

Be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid. That whoso- 
ever shall entertain any such Stranger, or transient Person or 
Persons for the space of Four Days, and the said Person shall 
while so Entertained be reduced by Sickness, or other Accident 
to necessitous Circumstances, whereby he, she, or they shall want 
Relief, the Person so entertaining such Stranger, or transient 
Person or Persons shall Support and Sustain the Charge thereof; 
excepting only when the Person Entertaining, as aforesaid, hath 
within the said Four Days, given sufficient Notice thereof to the 
Select-men of the Town: In which Case, if the Select-men do not 
use proper Methods to save the Town from Charge, then it shall 
be defrayed by such Town. 

Be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid. That if any 
Person or Persons within any Town in this Colony, shall sell, or 
convey any Land to any Person or Persons, who contrary to this 
Act would under Colour of such Purchase make his, her or their 
Abode in such Town; he or they Selling, as aforesaid, shall for 
every such Offence forfeit, and pay as a Fine, the Sum of Ten 
Pounds: One Moiety to the Town Treasurer where such Land lies; 
and the other Half to him who shall Complain of, and Prosecute 
the same to Effect. 

And be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid. That the 
Civil Authority, when and so often as there shall be Occasion in 
any Town, shall be, and they are hereby Impowred, to Order any 
Vagrant, or Suspected, or transient Person or Persons to be sent 
back from Constable to Constable, to the Town, Place, or Places 



70 Warning Out in New England 

from whence he, she, or they came; unless such Person or Persons 
produce good Certificate of their good Behaviour and Freedom 
from all Engagements, and that they are at liberty to remove 
themselves as they see meet. 

And if any such Persons shall return after such sending back, 
as aforesaid, and abide and continue in said Town from whence 
sent, after Warning given them to Depart, they shall be Whipt 
on the naked Body, not exceeding Ten Stripes: And may again 
be sent, and dealt with as aforesaid, as often as there shall be 
Occasion. 

And the Select-men in the respective Towns in this Colony, are 
hereby Impowred and Directed to prosecute all Breaches of this 
Act.* 

In 1784 an Act was passed for the admission of 
inhabitants in towns and for preventing charge on 
account of such as are not admitted therein, as fol- 
lows : — 

Be it enacted by the Governor, Council and Representatives, in 
General Court assembled, and by the Authority of the same. That no 
transient Person or Inhabitant of any other State, who may 
come to reside or dwell in any Town in this State, shall gain a 
legal Settlement in such Town by dwelling there, unless admitted 
by a major Vote of the Inhabitants of such Town, or by Consent 
of the civil Authority in and Select-men of said Town, or unless 
such Persons shall be appointed and execute some Public Office, 
or have been possessed in his own Right in Fee of a real Estate 
of the Value of One Hundred Pounds in such Town, during his 
Continuance there; but such Persons, not having gained a Settle- 
ment as aforesaid, if the Select-men judge they are likely to 
become chargeable to said Town, may be removed to the Place 
of their last legal Settlement, notwithstanding any length of Time 
that they may have been suffered to continue in such Town. 

That no Person shall be received or admitted an Inhabitant 
in any Town in this State, but such as are knoMn to be of an 
honest Conversation, and shall be accepted by the major Part of 
the Town, or by the Authority in and Select-men of the Town. 
And no Stranger or transient Person shall be allowed to reside 

* Acts and Laws of His Majesty's English Colony of Connecticut in New-Eng- 
land in America, 1769, pp. 99, 100, 101. 



Warning Out in New England 71 

or make his or her Abode in any Town in this State, (Appren- 
tices under age and Servants bought for Time excepted) upon 
Pretence of hiring or being hired, or of Tenantship, or Inmates 
without the Approbation of the Authority in and Select-men of 
such Town. 

That if any Person or Persons shall contrary to the Intent 
of this Act, entertain or hire any Stranger or transient Person, 
or let any House or Land to such Stranger or transient Person, 
except he or they shall first give Security to the Acceptance 
of the said Authority and Select-men, that such Town shall not 
be burthened and charged by him or them; which Security such 
Authority and Select-men may take or refuse at their Discretion; 
he or they so entertaining, or hiring, or letting any House or 
Land to such Stranger or transient Person, shall forfeit and 
pay to the Treasurer of such Town, the Sum of Ten Shillings 
per Week, for every Week he or they shall harbour, entertain, 
hire, or let such Estate to such Person. 

And if any such Stranger or transient Person shall, contrary 
to the Intent of this Act, make his or her Abode within any 
Town in this State, every such Person shall forfeit and pay to 
such Treasurer Ten Shillings per Week, for every Week that he 
or she shall continue in such Town, after Warning given to him 
or her, by order of the Select-men of said Town; or upon their 
Request, by Warrant from Authority to depart such Town, (which 
Warning the Select-men are impowered to order, or give:) And 
the said Authority, on Request as aforesaid, is impowered to 
issue a Warrant to the Constable, to warn such Persons to depart, 
as aforesaid. 

And when any such Stranger or transient Person, who shall 
be convicted of the Breach of this Act, and hath no Estate to 
satisfy the Fine, such Person shall be whipped upon his naked 
Body, not exceeding Ten Stripes; unless he or she depart the 
Town within Ten Days next after Sentence given, and reside no 
more therein without Leave of the Select-men. 

Any one Assistant or Justice of the Peace, to hear and deter- 
mine the Breach of this Act. 

Be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid. That whoso- 
ever shall entertain such Stranger or transient Person or Per- 
sons, for the Space of Four Days, and the said Person shall, when 
so entertained, be reduced by Sickness, or other Accident, to 
necessitous Circumstances, whereby he, she or they shall want 



72 Warning Out in New England 

Relief, the Person so entertaining such Stranger or transient 
Person or Persons, shall support and sustain the Charge thereof; 
excepting only when the Person entertaining as aforesaid, hath 
within the said Four Days, given sufficient Notice thereof to 
the Select-men of the Town; in which Case, if the Select-men 
do not use proper Methods to save the Town from Charge, then 
it shall be defrayed by such Town. 

Be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid. That if any 
Person or Persons within any Town in this State, shall sell or 
convey any Land to any Person or Persons, who contrary to 
this Act, would under Colour of such Purchase, make his, her or 
their Abode in such Town; he or they selling as aforesaid, shall 
for every such Offence, forfeit and pay as a Fine, the Sum of Ten 
Pounds: one Moiety to the Town Treasury where such Land 
lies, and the other Half to him who shall complain of and prose- 
cute the same to Effect. 

And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That the 
civil Authority, when and so often as there shall be Occasion in 
any Town, shall be, and they are hereby impowered to order any 
Vagrant, suspected or transient Person or Persons to be sent 
back, from Constable to Constable, to the Town, Place or Places 
from whence he, she or they came ; unless such Person or Persons 
produce good Certificates of their good Behaviour, and Freedom 
from all Engagements, and that they are at Liberty to remove 
themselves as they shall see meet. . . . 

And that said Authority may in like Manner remove any 
Stranger or transient Person or Persons who shall neglect or refuse, 
or be unable to depart such Town after Warning given, as before 
in this Act is provided. 

And if any such Persons shall return after such sending back, 
as aforesaid, and abide and continue in said Town from whence 
sent, after Warning given them to depart, they shall be whipt 
on the naked Body, not exceeding ten Stripes; and may again 
be sent and dealt with as aforesaid, as often as there shall be 
Occasion. 

And the Select-men in the respective Towns in this State, 
are hereby impowered and directed to prosecute all Breaches of 
this Act. 

And be it further enacted. That any Inhabitant of any Town 
within this State, may, for the better Support of himself or 
Family, have Liberty to remove with his Family into any other 



Warning Out in New England 73 

Town in this State, and continue there without being liable to 
be removed, provided such Person procure a Certificate in Writ- 
ing, under the Hands of the civil Authority in and Select-men of 
the Town from whence he removes, that he is a legal Inhabitant 
in that Town, and lodge the same with the Clerk of the Town to 
which he removes. And in Case such Person or any of his Family, 
stand in Need of Relief from said Town, he or they shall be sup- 
ported at the Cost of the Town where such Person was setteled 
and obtained a Certificate as aforesaid; and may be returned 
back to such Town, provided such Person hath not been admitted 
an Inhabitant, or gained a Settlement, as before in this Act is 
provided, in any other Town, after such Certificate was given. 

Provided nevertheless. That Persons coming to reside in any 
Town as aforesaid, they and their Estates shall be as liable to 
be taken under the Care of the Select-men of the Town where they 
dwell, for Mismanagement, Idleness or bad Husbandry, agreeable 
to the Law in that Case provided, as if they had a legal Settle- 
ment in such Town; and nothing in this Act shall be construed 
to hinder such Towns from ridding themselves of any Vagrant, 
or Persons whom such Town, or the Authority therein, or the 
Select-men thereof shall judge to be of disorderly, ungoverned or 
vicious Conversation. 

And be it further enacted. That any Inhabitant of any Town 
in this State, who shall go to reside in any other Town in this 
State, without having a Certificate as aforesaid, may be removed 
and sent back to the Town to which he or she belongs, in like 
Manner as is before provided in this Act for the Removal of any 
Stranger, or transient Person: Provided such Person shall not 
have continued in such Town one Year before Warning given 
to depart, or one Year after such Warning, without being prose- 
cuted as aforesaid.* 

In 1792 an Act in addition to and alteration of an 
Act entitled "An Act for the admission of Inhabi- 
tants in Towns, and for preventing charge on account 
of such as are admitted therein," was passed as 
follows : — 

Be it enacted by the Governor, Council, and Representatives 
in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, 
* Ads and Laws of Connecticut, 1784, pp. 102-104. 



74 Warning Out in New England 

That the provisions of said Act notwithstanding, any Inhabitant 
of any Town in this State may remove with liis or her family; 
or if such person has no family, may remove him or herself into 
any other Town in this State, and continue there, without being 
liable to be warned to depart, or to be removed therefrom, except 
in the case herein after provied ; and shall gain a legal settlement 
in the Town to which he or she may have so removed, in case he 
or she shall reside in such Town for the full term of six years next, 
from and after his or her first removal into such Town; and shall 
during the whole of said term, have supported him or herself, and 
his or her family; if such person have a family at the time of said 
first removal, or at any time during said term, without his, her, or 
their becoming chargeable to such Town, or to the Town that may 
by law be liable to charge for the support of such person and 
family; but if any such person shall at any time before the expi- 
ration of said term of six years, become unable to support and 
maintain him or herself, and family, if any be, and chargeable to 
the Town, that may be liable to charge for his, her or their support; 
in that case every such person with his or her family, if any be, 
may be removed to the place of his or her last legal settlement, 
in manner as in said Act is already provided. 

And be it further enacted. That any person who shall bring 
into this State, any poor and indigent person, and leave him or 
her in any Town within the same, of which Town he or she is 
not an inhabitant, such person so bringing in and leaving such 
poor and indigent person, shall forfeit and pay, for every such 
person so brought in, and left, the sum of Twenty Pounds lawful 
money, to be recovered in any Court proper to try the same, to, 
and for the use of such Towne.* 

In 179G a Settlement Act was passed, providing 
how inhabitants might be admitted into towns, as 
follows : — 

An Act for the Admission of Inhabitants in Towns and for 
Preventing Charge on Account of such as are not 
admitted therein. 

Par. 1. Be it enacted by the Governor and Council, and House 
of Representatives, in General Court assembled. That no Person 

* Connecticut Laws, 1784 to 1792, p. 412. 



Warning Out in New England 75 

who is not an Inhabitant of this State, or of any of the United 
States, who may come to reside in any Town in this State, shall 
gain a legal Settlement in such Town, unless admitted by Vote 
of the Inhabitants of such Town, or by Consent of the Civil 
Authority in, and Select-men of such Town, or unless such Person 
shall be appointed to and execute some public Office. 

2. Be it further enacted, That no Person who is an Inhabitant 
of any of the United States (this State excepted) who may come 
to reside in any Town in this State, shall gain a legal Settlement 
therein, unless he have some one of the Requisites enumerated 
in the preceding Paragraph, or unless he shall have been possessed 
in his own Right in fee of a real Estate of the value of Three Hun- 
dred and Thirty-four Dollars, during his continuance there, but 
such Person not having gained a Settlement as aforesaid, if the 
Select-men judge he is likely to become chargeable to such Town, 
may be removed to the Place of his last legal Settlement, as is 
hereafter in this Act provided. 

3. Be it further enacted. That no Inhabitant of any Town in 
this State, shall gain a legal Settlement in any other Town in this 
State, unless he have some one of the Requisites enumerated in 
the first Paragraph of this Act, or unless he shall have been pos- 
sessed in his own Right, in Fee of a real Estate of the Value of 
One Hundred Dollars, in the Town to which he may have re- 
moved, during his Continuance therein, or unless he hath sup- 
ported himself for the Term of six Years, agreeably to a subse- 
quent Provision in this Act. 

4. Be it further enacted, That any Inhabitant of any Town in 
this State, may remove with his or her Family, or if such Person 
have no Family, may remove him or herself into any other Town 
in this State, and continue there without being liable to be warned 
to depart, or to be removed therefrom, except in the Case herein 
after provided; and shall gain a legal Settlement in the Town to 
which he or she may have so removed, in Case he or she shall 
reside in such Town, for the full Term of six Years next, from and 
after his or her first removal into such Town; and shall during 
the whole of said Term, have supported him or herself, and his 
or her Family; if such Person have a Family at the time of said 
first removal, or at any Time during said Term, without his, her, 
or their becoming Chargeable to such Town, or to the Town that 
may by law be liable to Charge for the Support of such Person 
and Family; but if any such Person shall at any Time before the 



76 Warning Out in New England 

Expiration of said Term of six Years, become unable to support 
and maintain him or herself and Family, if any be, and become 
chargeable to the Town, that may be liable to charge for his, her, 
or thfcir Support; in that Case every such Person, with his or 
her Family, if any be, may be removed to the Place of his or her 
last legal Settlement, in the same Manner as is hereafter provided 
in this Act, respecting the removal of Inhabitants of other States.* 

5. Be it further enacted. That when an Inhabitant of any of 
the United States (this State excepted) shall come to reside in any 
Town in this State, the Civil Authority or major part of them 
in such Town are hereby authorized (upon the application of the 
Select-men) if they judge proper, by warrant under their hands 
directed to either of the Constables of said Town, to order said 
Person to be conveyed to the State, from whence he or she came; 
and such Constable on receiving said Warrant, is hereby author- 
ized to execute the same, and the Expence thereof being liqui- 
dated and allowed by the Select-men of the Town to which such 
Constable belongs, shall be paid out of the Treasury of such 
Town. And also the Expence of conveying an Inhabitant of this 
State as aforesaid, shall be liquidated, allowed and paid in the 
same Manner; Provided such Person in either Case has not 
gained a legal Settlement as aforesaid. 

6. Be it further enacted, That the Select-men of any Town be, 
and they are hereby authorized, either by themselves, or by 
Warrant from an Assistant or Justice of the Peace, in such Town, 
directed to either Constable of such Town, which Warrant such 
Assistant or Justice is hereby authorized to give, to warn any 
Person not an Inhabitant of this State, to depart such Town, 
and the Person so warned, shall forfeit and pay to the Treasurer 
of such Town, One Dollar and Sixty-seven Cents per Week, for 
every Week he or she shall continue in such Town, after Warning 
given as aforesaid; and when any such Person who shall be con- 
victed of the Breach of this Act, in refusing to depart on Warn- 
ing as aforesaid, hath no Estate to satisfy the Fine, such Person 
shall be whipped on the naked Body not exceeding ten Stripes, 
unless he or she depart the Town within ten Days next after 
Sentence given, and reside no more therein, without leave of the 
Select-men. Provided nevertheless, That nothing contained in 
this Paragraph, or the Paragraph next preceeding, shall be con- 

* The foregoing paragraph was enacted in May, 1792. 



Warning Out in New England 77 

strued to effect Apprentices under Age, or Servants bought for 
Time. 

7. Be it further enacted, That if any Person not an Inhabitant 
of this State, shall return after such sending away as aforesaid, 
and abide in said Town from whence sent, after Warning given 
him to depart as aforesaid, he shall be whipped on the naked 
Body not exceeding ten Stripes, and may again be sent away, 
and dealt with as aforesaid, as often as there shall be Occasion; 
and the Select-men in the respective Towns are hereby empow- 
ered and directed to prosecute all Breaches of this Act. 

8. Be it further enacted, That if any Inhabitant in any Town, 
shall contrary to the intent of this Act, entertain or hire any 
such Person not an Inhabitant of this State, who shall come to 
reside in such Town, or let any House or Land to such Person, 
unless such Inhabitant shall first give Security to the Acceptance 
of the Authority and Select-men of such Town, to save said 
Town from all Expence that might be occasioned thereby; such 
Inhabitant shall forfeit and pay to the Treasury of such Town, 
One Dollar and Sixty-seven Cents, per Week, for every Week 
he or she shall harbor, entertain, hire, or let Estate as aforesaid. 

9. Be it further enacted. That any Person who shall bring 
into this State any poor and indigent Person, and leave him or 
her in any Town within the same, of which Town he or she is not 
an Inhabitant, such Person so bringing in and leaving such poor 
and indigent Person, shall forfeit and pay for every such Person 
so brought in and left, the Sum of Sixty-seven Dollars, to be re- 
covered in any Court proper to try the same, to and for the Use 
of such Town. 

10. Be it further enacted, That whosoever shall entertain any 
Person not an Inhabitant of any Town in this State, for the 
space of fourteen Days, and the said Person shall, when so enter- 
tained, be reduced by Sickness, or otherwise, to necessitous Cir- 
cumstances, so as to need Relief, the Person so entertaining shall 
support and sustain the Charge thereof, excepting only when he 
hath within the said fourteen Days, given sufficient Notice thereof 
to the Select-men of the Town in which such Person is so enter- 
tained, in which Case it shall be defrayed out of the public Treas- 
ury of this State, by Order of the Governor and Council, (unless 
the Person so entertained hath Relations who by Law are liable 
for his Support) and all Expence that may be incurred in the 
Support of such Person within the Term of three Months, from 



78 Warning Out in New England 

the Time of his coming to such Town, in Case he shall within the 
Term of three Months, have been warned to depart said Town, 
shall in like Manner be defrayed out of the public Treasury of 
this State, and all Expences that may arise in Support of such 
Person, subsequent to the said Term of three Months, on account 
of Sickness or Lameness, which shall have commenced within the 
said Term of three Months, and which shall have continued be- 
yond the said Term, to such a Degree as to render it unsafe to 
remove such Person, shall during the continuance of such Sickness 
or Lameness only, be defrayed out of the public Treasury of this 
State, and all subsequent Expences shall be defrayed by such 
Town, during his continuance therein. 

11. Be it further enacted, That the several Towns in this State, 
shall be holden to support and maintain their respective Inhabi- 
tants, whether living within the Towns to which they belong, or 
in any other Town in this State, who may need Relief, and any 
Town which shall have pursuant to the Provisions of this Act, 
incurred Expence in supporting the Inhabitants of any other 
Town, shall have Liberty in Addition to the Provision already 
made, to bring any proper Action at common Law against the 
said Town for the recovery of such Expence.* 

It will be seen that this Act prevented any person 
not an inhabitant of Connecticut, or of any of the 
United States {i.e., a foreigner), from becoming a legal 
inhabitant of a town except by vote of the inhabi- 
tants of the town or consent of the civil authority 
and selectmen without such vote, or by being ap- 
pointed to and executing some public office. It also 
prevented any inhabitant of the United States except 
Connecticut from becoming a legal inhabitant of a 
town without being admitted in the manner provided 
for foreigners, or being possessed of real estate in fee 
to the value of $334. 

It also provided that no inhabitant of Connect- 
icut should become a legal inhabitant in any town 
unless he was admitted by the town or the author- 

* Ads and Laws of the State of Connecticut, 1796, p. 239. 



Warning Out in New England 79 

ities, or appointed to and executed a public office, 
or possessed of real estate in fee of the value of $100, 
or should have resided in and supported himself and 
family in the town for the full term of six years next 
from and after first coming into the town. This 
practically repealed the law as to warning persons 
living in Connecticut to depart from any town into 
which they might remove. 

As to inhabitants of the United States coming into 
any town in Connecticut, the Act provided that the 
civil authority of the town, being the justices of the 
peace, might upon application of the selectmen cause 
them to be conveyed out of Connecticut to the State 
from whence they came. The Act also provided that 
the selectmen might by warrant to a constable of the 
town "warn any person not an inhabitant of this 
state to depart such town," and that the "person so 
warned should forfeit to the Treasurer of the town 
$1.67 a week for every week he remained in town 
after the warning." The Act also provided that any 
person who should be convicted of refusing to depart 
when warned, who had no estate to satisfy the fine, 
should be "whipped on the naked body not exceeding 
ten stripes, unless he or she depart the town within 
ten days next after sentence, and reside no more 
therein without leave of the selectmen." And the 
Act further provided that any person warned out, 
who went away and then returned, should be "whipped 
on the naked body not exceeding ten stripes and again 
sent away," and "dealt with as aforesaid as often as 
there shall be occasion." 

This Act further provided that no inhabitant in any 
town should entertain or hire any person not an in- 
habitant of Connecticut who should come to reside 
in such town, or let any house or land to such person 



80 Warning Out in New England 

without security first given to the acceptance of the 
civil authority and selectmen of the town to save the 
town from all expense that might be occasioned thereby, 
under a penalty of $1.67 a week for every week that 
any inhabitant "should harbour, entertain, hire or 
let estate" to such new-comer, and also provided that 
whoever should entertain any person not being an 
inhabitant of any town in the State for fourteen days, 
should be chargeable with the support of such person 
unless within the fourteen days he gave notice thereof 
to the selectmen of the town, and that if within three 
months of the time of his coming into town such new- 
comer should be warned to depart the town, then the 
charges of his support should be paid by the State 
during said three months, and during such further 
time as it might be unsafe on account of sickness or 
lameness of the person to remove him from the town, 
and that otherwise all subsequent expense beyond 
said three months from the time of warning should be 
paid by the town.* 

Such were the provisions of the law of a Christian 
State, and they were substantially re-enacted in 1805.t 

The provision as to removal of any inhabitant of 
any other State than Connecticut from a town in the 
State, and the provision for warning out any person 
not an inhabitant of the State, and also the provi- 
sion against entertaining or hiring or letting any house 
or land to any person not an inhabitant of the State, 
were retained in the successive revisions of the stat- 
utes in 1821, 1835, 1849, 1854, 1866, 1875, and 1888, 
except that in 1835 the provision that any person 
warned out who should refuse to depart and have no 
estate to satisfy the fine of $1.67 a week, whenever he 

* Ads and Laws of Connecticut, 1796, p. 239. 
t Connecticut Latos, 1805, pp. 239, 294. 



Warning Out in New England 81 

or she continued in town after the warning, should 
be whipped on the naked body, not exceeding ten 
stripes, etc., was repealed. The repeal was found, 
however, in an Act to prevent the setting up of schools 
for the instruction of colored persons from other 
States, which provided that 

Whereas, attempts have been made to establish literary 
institutions in this state for the instruction of colored persons 
belonging to other states and countries, which would tend to the 
great increase of the colored population of the state, and thereby 
to the injury of the people: Therefore, 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in 
General Assembly convened. Sect. 1. That no person shall set 
up or establish in this state any school, academy, or literary 
institution, for the instruction or education of colored persons 
who are not inhabitants of this state, nor instruct or teach in any 
school, academy, or other literary institution whatsoever in this 
state, or harbor or board, for the purpose of attending or being 
taught or instructed in any such school, academy, or literary 
institution, any colored person who is not an inhabitant of any 
town in this state without, the consent, in writing, first obtained 
of a majority ox the civil authority, and also of the select-men 
of the town in which such school, academy, or literary institution 
is situated; and each and every person who shall knowingly do 
any act forbidden as aforesaid, or shall be aiding or assisting 
therein, shall, for the first offence, forfeit and pay to the treasurer 
of this state, a fine of one hundred dollars, and for the second 
offence shall forfeit and pay a fine of two hundred dollars, and so 
double for every offence of which he or she shall be convicted. 
And all informing officers are required to make due presentment 
of all breaches of this act.* 

And also except that in 1854 the provision that any 
person not an inhabitant of Connecticut, who should re- 
turn after having been warned out, should be whipped 
on the naked body and again sent away, and whipped 
again so often as he might come back, was omitted 
from the statute; and that in 1888 the provision that 

* Public Statute Laws of Connecticut, 1835, Title 53, p. 321. 



Warning Out in New England 



^t5 



any inhabitant of any other State than Connecticut 
might be conveyed out of the State was modified so 
that such person could be removed only if he became 
chargeable for support in the town within the first year 
of his residence therein.* 

The Connecticut Settlement Act now in force pro- 
vides for the admission of inhabitants by vote of the 
towns or consent of its justices of the peace and select- 
men, and prevents any person not an inhabitant of 
Connecticut or of the United States from obtaining a 
settlement in any other way. 

It also preserves the distinction between the in- 
habitants of other States and inhabitants of Connect- 
icut by providing a different property qualification and 
a different term of residence to acquire a settlement. 
Inhabitants of other States must have resided in the 
town one year, and have been admitted by vote of 
the town, or have resided in the town one year and 
have been possessed in fee of unencumbered real estate 
in Connecticut to the value of $334. Inhabitants of 
Connecticut can gain a legal settlement in a town in 
that State only by being admitted by vote of the 
inhabitants or bj^ having resided four years continu- 
ously in the town without becoming chargeable for 
support of the town. 

In short, inhabitants of other States can obtain 
settlements either by being admitted by vote of the 
town or by residing in the town one year and being 
possessed of unencumbered real estate to the value of 
$334. Inhabitants of other towns in Connecticut can 
gain settlement either by being admitted by vote of 

* Public Statute Laws of Connecticut, 1821, p. 236 et seq.; Public Statute Laws 
of Connecticut, 1835, p. 317 et seq.; Revised Statutes of Connecticut, 1849, p. 535; 
The Statutes of Connecticut, 1854, p. 717; General Statutes of Connecticut, 1866, 
p. 619; General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision 1875, p. 197; General Statutes of 
Connecticut, Revision 1887, p. 725. 



Warning Out in New England 83 

the town or by residing four years continuously in 
the town without themselves or their family becoming 
chargeable to the town during that time.* 

The action of Connecticut towns in regard to receiv- 
ing or warning out new-comers is illustrated by the fol- 
lowing instances: — 

In the town of Hartford, on the 1st of January, 
1638, it was agreed that the selectmen should have 
power to "order the Comon occations of the Towne," 
except in certain matters, one of which was that "they 
receaue noe new Inhabetant into the Towne w out 
Aprobacon of the body."t 

At a town meeting on February 14, 1659, it w^as 
provided that 

For the p'^uenting of future euills and inconueniances that 
many Times are Redy to break in upon us by many P'sons 
vsshering in themselues among us who are strangers to us, through 
whose pouerty euill maners or opions the towne is subject to be 
much p'^iudisshed and indamiadged. 

It is therefore ordered at the same towne metting that noe 
p'son or p'sons In Hartford shall giue entertainement or Receiue 
any fammily p''son or p'^sons that is not an Inhabitant soe as to 
Rent any part of his or thair house to him or them wherby he or 
thaye becom an inmate, without it bee first Concented to by 
the orderly uoat of the Inhabitanc at some towne metting vnder 
the forfiture of fine pounds for euery month to bee Recouered by 
the townsmen in being by a cours of law if other means will not 
p'uaile and this for the use of the towne: & allso all such p'sons 
as break this order shall be liabl to be called to an acount by the 
towne and beare all Just damiadges that shall accru to y'' towne 
therby.J 

August 20, 1660, the town of Hartford by their vote 
"gaue Jarrad Spencer liberty to dw^ell amongst us as an 

* General Statutes of Connecticut, Sects. 2466, 2469. 

t Hartford Town Votes, Vol. I, 1635-1716, p. 2, in Connecticut Historical 
Society Collection, Vol. VI. 

t Ibid., p. 128, in Connecticut Historical Society Collection, Vol. VI. 



84 Warning Out in New England 

inhabitant w^^^ us at Hartford." And at a town meet- 
ing held on November 20, 10(50, 

Y° Towne by their vote voted that Jeams Blore should not 
continue wi*'^ us as an Inhabitant: 

but upon John Stedmans request they granted him liberty 
to continnue In Hartford till springe he y*^ s*^ John Stedman en- 
gageing to secure y*^ Town from all damage thereby: 

at y^ same Town meeting y'^ Town by there vote did refuse 
to graunt Thomas marten liberty to be an Inhabitant in Hartford.* 

In Guilford the first settlers had a rule that no 
man should sell or purchase land in the town without 
leave of the town.f 

In Haddam in 1673 

It was agreed by voate that John Sled and his wief should not 
be entertained in the towne as inhabitants or resedence, and also 
Goodman Corbee was forewarned not to reseave him into his 
hows becose they weare not persones qualified according to Law.f 

In Enfield in 1683 the first settlers ordered that 
the inhabitants admitted should continue to live in 
the town for seven years before "they shall have 
wright to sell or any ways pass away any of their 
alotments to any person whatsoever."! 

In Wallingford applications for permission to live 
in the town were presented in town meeting and re- 
ferred to a committee, which examined the testimo- 
nials presented by the applicant as to his character. 
These testimonials required proof of the good con- 
versation of the persons in the places where they 
formerly lived, and in 1671 it was ordered that no 
one should come to dwell as planters in the town 

* Hartford Town Votes, Vol. 1, p. 132, in Connecticut Historical Society Col- 
lection. Vol. VI. 

t Smith, History oj Guilford, p. 54. 

X The Two Hundredth Anniversary of the First Congregational Church of Had- 
dam, Connecticut, October 14 and 17, 1900, p. 35. 

§ Allen, History of Enfield, p. C2. 



Warning Out in New England 85 

without consent and allowance of the committee of 
the town "whether they come in by purchase or other- 
wise." 

No sale could be made of any land to a stranger by 
an inhabitant of the town until the character of the 
proposed purchaser had been examined and approved, 
and leave granted by express vote of the town. There 
are many entries upon the town records like these:— 

l£th Feb. 1671. Agreed by y^ Comitee for y' Towne of 
Wallingford that Isack Rise, and Nehimia Rise, shall have lotts 
granted y™ provided they procure suficient testamoney of theyr 
good conversation in the place whear they formerly lived. 

£Oth Oct. 1674 voted that Good" Foote shall have liberty to 
buy the lott, y* is Joseph Eives provided he procure sufficient 
teastimony of his good conversation in y' plase wheare he now 
pretendeth to remove. 

Next January, we find "the teastimony for Goo" foote being 
sevesente and axepted, he was admited a planter upon the lot 
that was Joseph eives." 23rd February 1677. The towne gave 
liberty to Nath'l Hickock to sell his accommodation to any such 
men as ye towne shall approve of. 

December 20, 1679, The towne received Joe Brooks a planter 
of ye loer Ranks provided he bring sufficient testimony of his 
good conversation in ye place wheare he formerly lived. 

The town also required that persons coming into 
town temporarily must obtain permission. There are 
many records of this kind: — 

Sep. 1678. The towne gave liberty to Isack Curtice to abide 
in the town as a sojourner. 

Curtice lived in Hartford, and desired to visit his 
son in Wallingford, who was one of the first citizens 
of the town.* 

In Windsor a similar practice prevailed. The rec- 
ords show that December 1, 1651, "John Moses had 

* Davis, History of Wallingford, pp. 82, 83, 84, et seq. 



80 Warning Out in New England 

allowance to sojourn with Simon Miller in his house." 
Also that "John Bennett should be entertained by 
William Hayden in his family." 

December 10, 1659, the townsmen approved of that Thomas 
Gunn should entertain as a tabler Capt. Thomas in his family 
for this winter. 

June 27, 1059, it was ordered that 

No person or persons whatsoever shall be admitted inhabitant 
in this town of Windsor without the approbation of the town or 
townsmen that are or shall be from year to year in being. Nor 
shall any man sett or sell any house or land so as to bring in any 
to be inhabitant into the town without the approbation of the 
townsmen or giving any such security as may be accepted to save 
the town from damage. 

In April, 1G99, a widow by the name of Rix made 
application for liberty to remain in town. The re- 
quest was not granted, and the record shows that 

the townsmen do not see reason to grant her request, but have now 
warned her to remove out of this town to the town from whence 
she came or to some other place that she may prevent the towns- 
men proceeding against her according to law.* 

In Woodbury the fundamental articles of agree- 
ment signed by the first settlers provided that none 
of them should sell or let any of their lands or houses 
to any person but such as the town should approve 
of, the town promising either to purchase of the per- 
sons removing and desiring to sell, or to approve "of 
such blameless man in his conversation with certifi- 
cates according to law that shall be presented to buy 
ye same, "t 

In New Haven no one was admitted to be a planter 
or an inhabitant without the consent of the town. 

* Stiles, History of Ancient Windsor, pp. 81, 82. 

t Cothren, History of Ancient Woodbury, Vol. I, p. 40. 



Warning Out in New England 87 

May, 1650, a law was passed forbidding the "disposal 
of any house, house-lott, land, or any part or parcel 
of the same, to Strangers," and no one was permitted 
to entertain a stranger longer than three weeks with- 
out permission from the authorities. 

In 1655, however, by what was known as "Eaton's 
Code," it was provided that residence within a planta- 
tion for a year even without a license was suflScient 
to cause a stranger to become an inhabitant. 

The same custom of admitting inhabitants upon 
surety to save the town from liability prevailed in 
Connecticut as in Massachusetts. In 1656 Mrs. Finch, 
of West Chester, came to New Haven and rented a 
house, in order that her lame child might be treated by 
John Winthrop, who was skilled as a surgeon. The 
town, however, voted not to let her stay unless some 
approved person offered himself as her security, which 
being done by two persons, she was permitted to re- 
main. 

And when in 1659 John Winthrop, who was then 
governor of the colony, wished to let his house and 
lot in New Haven, the town refused to allow it, and 
forced him to sell it to the town.* 

* Livermore, The Republic of New Haven, pp. 103, 104, 106. 



CHAPTER V. 

New Hampshire Colony and State Laws. — Action of 
Towns as to Inhabitancy, Warning Out, Relief of 
THE Poor, etc. 

The first settlers of New Hampshire asserted the 
right of towns to admit or exchide new-comers. In 
1641 the inhabitants of Exeter provided that "none 
but inhabitants of the town shall plant [settle] within 
the town's liberties [grant] without their consent." * 

The right of towns to exclude strangers was recog- 
nized by the "Generall Lawes & Liberties of the Prov- 
ince of New Hampshire made by the Generall Assem- 
bly in Portsm". the 16th of March, 16g^ and aproved 
by the Presid* and Councill" in these words: — 

Likewise it is further ordered y* if any pson come into my 
house w^^^in this province & be there reed. & entertained 3 m° 
if such pson fall sick or lame he shall be relieved by y* towne 
where he was soe long entertained but if ye constable of y* towne 
or any of y*' selectmen have given warning to such pson w in 
y® space of 3 m°*^^ y* y*" towne will not admit of him if such 
pson shall stand in need of reliefe y'' towne shall supply his neces- 
sity untill y*" Presid^ & Coun" can dispose of him as to y™ shall 
seem most just and equall.f 

Here the necessity for warning out to prevent the 
town from becoming chargeable for the support of a 
stranger is clearly recognized. 

Two other orders passed at the same time and a part 
of the so-called Laws and Liberties adopted at Ports- 
mouth October 11, 16|?, were as follows: — 

(41) It is also ordered; That if any children, or elder persons 
shal be sent or come from one Town to another, to School, or 

* Laws of New Hampshire, Province Period, Vol. I, p. 742. 
t Ibid.. Vol. I, p. 36. 



Warning Out in New England 89 

to nurs, or otherwise to be educated; or to a Physitian or Sur- 
geon, to be cured or healed; if such shal stand in need of rehef, 
they shal be releeved at the charge of the Town, from whence 
they came, or do belong; and not by the Town, to which they 
are sent. And in case they be sent from any Town without 
this Province, the taker, nurs, physitian, or surgeon, to whom 
they are sent, shal take good security to save the Town & Prov- 
ince chargeless, or shal be responsible themselves for such as 
need releef.* 

(43) Be it also Enacted; That no person Master of any 
Vessel, or other, do bring into any of our Towns within the Prov- 
ince, any person or persons, without the approbation of the 
President, or three of the Councel, or the Select-men of each 
Town: Nor that any Inhabitant within this Province, do enter- 
tain in his family any person that is not so allowed, for more 
than one week, without giving notice thereof to one of the Mem- 
bers of the Councel, or to the Select -men of the Town to which 
they belong; On penalty of forfeiting ffive pound to the Town & 
of being liable to be sued, & giving bond to free the Town from 
damage. Provided, this Order shal not hinder any man from 
taking of an Apprentice, or covenant servant for year or years, 
that is at pr'sent sound & wel. And if such servant shal fal 
sick, or lame. He shal be maintained by his Master during the 
date of his indenture, or coven't and afterwards by the Town 
in case of necessity, f 

In 1718 another Act was passed, entitled "An Act 
directing the admission of Town inhabitants." The 
preamble of this Act was as follows: — 

For the better preventing of persons obtruding themselves 
on any particular town within this province, without orderly 
admission by the inhabitants of such town, or the select-men 
thereof in manner as hereafter is expressed: and for remedying 
the manifold inconveniences, and great charge heretofore oc- 
casioned thereby: to the intent also, that the select-men may the 

* Laws of New Hampshire, Province Period, Vol. I, § 41, p. 36 (Acts of the 
Assembly in Portsmouth, October 11, 1680-81). 

t Ibid., § 43, p. 37 (Acts of the Assembly in Portsmouth, October 11, 
1680-81). 



90 Warning Out in New England 

more easily come to the certain knowledge of persons, and their 
circumstances, that come to reside, and sojourn in such town. 

The Act required masters of ships arriving from 
any other country to give lists of passengers to the 
naval officer, and, if any passenger should be im- 
potent, lame, or otherwise infirm, or likely to be a 
charge to the place, and could not give security for 
saving the town from such charge, the master of 
the ship should be required to carrj^ him or her out 
of the province within two months, or give sufficient 
security to indemnify and keep the town free from 
charge. The Act then provided as follows: — 

That from and after the publication of this act, no person 
whatever coming to reside or dwell in any town in this province, 
other than freeholders and proprietors of land in such town, or 
those born, or that have served an apprenticeship there, and have 
not remov'd and become inhabitants elsewhere, shall be admitted 
to the privilege of elections in such towns (though otherwise 
qualified) unless such person shall first make known his desire 
to the selectmen thereof, and obtain their approbation, or the 
approbation of the town, for his dwelling there. 

Nor shall any town be obliged to be at charge for the relief 
and support of any person residing in such town, in case he or 
she stand in need, that are not approved as aforesaid, unless 
such person or persons have continued their residence there, 
by the space of twelve months next before, and have not been 
warned in manner as the law directs, to depart and leave the 
town: any law, usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding. 

And if any person orderly warned to depart from any town 
whereof he or she is not an inhabitant, and being sent by warrant 
from a justice of peace unto the town whereto such person prop- 
erly belongs, or to the place of his or her last abode, shall presume 
to return back, and obtrude him or herself upon the town so sent 
from, by residing there, every person so offending, shall be pro- 
ceeded against as a vagabond.* 

In 1719 an Act was passed for regulating town- 

* Acts and Laws of Province of New Hampshire in New England, edition 1771, 
p. 123. 



Warning Out in New England 91 

ships, choice of town officers, and setting forth their 
power, which provided that 

If any person or persons come to sojourn, or dwell in any town 
within this province, or precinct thereof, and be there received, 
and entertained by the space of three months, not having been 
warned by the constable, or other person whom the select-men 
shall appoint for that end to leave the place, and the names of 
such persons with the time of their abode there, and when such 
warning was given them, returned unto the court of quarter ses- 
sions; every such person shall be reputed an inhabitant of such 
town, or precinct of the same, and the proper charge of the same, 
in case, through sickness, lameness, or otherwise, they come to 
stand in need of relief, to be born by such town; unless the re- 
lations of such poor impotent persons in the line of father, or 
grand-father, mother, or grand-mother, children, or grand- 
children be of sufficient ability; then such relations respectively 
shall relieve such poor person in such manner as the justices of 
the peace shall assess, on pain that every one failing therein, 
shall forfeit thirty shillings for every months neglect, to be levied 
by distress and sale of such offenders goods, by warrant from any 
two justices of the peace, unus quorum, within this province. 
Provided nevertheless, this act shall not be understood of any 
person committed to prison, or lawfully restrained in any town, 
or of such as shall come, or be sent for nursing, or education, 
or to any phycisian, or chyrurgeon, to be healed or cured, but 
the particular persons who receive and entertain any such shall 
be the towns security in their behalf, and be obliged to relieve 
and support them, in case of need, upon complaint made to the 
quarter sessions, who shall accordingly order the same. 

And it is further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that any 
person, orderly warned, as aforesaid, to depart any town where 
he is not an inhabitant, and neglecting so to do by the space of 
fourteen days next after such w^arning given, may by warrant 
from the next justice of the peace be sent and conveyed from 
constable to constable, unto the town where he properly belongs, 
or had his last residence at his own charge, if able to pay the 
same, or otherwise at the charge of the town so sending him.* 

* Acts and Laws of Province of New Hampshire in New England, edition 1771, 
pp. 136, 140. 



92 Warning Out in New England 

In 17G6 an Act was passed in addition to the Act of 
1719 directing the admission of town inhabitants, im- 
posing a penalty for entertaining strangers, and provid- 
ing that the expense of warning such persons as were 
not inliabitants should be defrayed by the persons who 
entertained them, as follows: — 

Whereas the said act has not sufficiently provided against per- 
sons secretly entertaining strangers in their houses till they become 
inhabitants, which by another law of this province they are allowed 
to be in three months, by which means many persons become inhabi- 
tants of towns, before they are known to live in the town, by the of- 
ficers whose care it is to take notice of such matters, for remedy 
whereof 

Be it enacted by the governor council and assembly, 
that the inhabitants of the several towns within this province and 
parishes having the privileges of towns, who shall receive admit 
and entertain any person or persons not being inhabitants of 
such towns or parishes, either as inmates, boarders or tenants in 
the house where such person dwells, or in any other house whatso- 
ever within this province, or under any other qualifications what- 
soever, for more than the space of twenty days and shall not in 
writing under their hands give an account to one or more of the 
select-men, or the town clerk of such town of all such person or 
persons so received, admitted or entertained by them, with the 
time they first received them and the place from whence they 
last came, together with their circumstances as far as they can, 
shall for every such neglect forfeit & pay the sum of twenty 
shillings to be recovered by bill plaint or information before any 
justice of the peace or in any of his majesty's courts of record 
within this province, the one half of the said fine to be employed 
to and for the use of the poor of the town or parish where such 
officers shall be committed the other half to him or them that shall 
inform and sue for the same & they shall be liable to answer all 
charges that may arise in said town or parish by receiving & 
entertaining such person or persons as aforesaid, to be recovered 
by the town treasurer or select-men where no treasurer is ap- 
pointed, who are hereby respectively impowered to bring an action 
accordingly. 

And be it further enacted that all costs and charges arising by 



Warning Out in New England 93 

warning any such persons as are not inhabitants entering the 
caution or carrying them out of town, shall be defrey'd and pay'd 
by those who received & entertained such person or persons in 
their houses as aforesaid and shall be recovered as afores^ for 
the uses afores'^, & the town treasurer or select-men afores , are 
hereby directed and ordered, before they bring their action to 
exhibit to such who receive and entertain any person or persons 
in their houses as afores'' an acco* of the charges arising thereby 
and upon refusing to pay the same within five days they shall be 
liable to pay said charges and be deprived of their benefit by their 
notification tho' given within the twenty days as afores*^, [this 
act to continue and be in force for the term of five years and no 
longer.]* 

In 1771 an Act was passed providing that the time 
within which warning out would defeat a settlement 
be extended to twelve months, as follows: — 

Whereas in and by an act or law of this province made and 
passed in the fifth year of the reign of King George the First it is 
among other things enacted that if any person or persons come to 
sojourn or dwell in any town within this province or precinct 
thereof, and be there received and entertained by the space of 
three months, not having been warned by the constable or other 
person whom the select-men shall appoint for that end, to leave 
the place and the names of such persons with the time of their 
abode there, & when such warning was given them returned unto 
the court of general sessions of the peace; every such person shall 
be reputed an inhabitant of such town or precinct of the same, 
to be relieved by such town in case of need — which time or space 
of three months is found to be too short for the purposes afore- 
said, the select-men in many instances not being able to discover 
such poor person or persons within that time. For remedy 
whereof 

Be it enacted by the governor, council and assembly that from 
and after the first day of July next no person or persons shall gain 
a settlement in any town or parish within this province by dwell- 
ing therein without being warned out according to law: For any 
term of time less than one year. 

*Acts and Laws of Province of New Hampshire in New England, edition 
1771, Appendix, p. 25. 



94 Warning Out in New England 

April 9, 1777, this Act was revived and re-enacted 
by the State of New Hampshire by "An Act for the 
re-establishing the general system of laws heretofore 
in force in this State."* 

February 15, 1791, in "An Act for the punishment 
of idle and disorderly persons, for the support and 
maintenance of the poor, and for designating the duties 
and defining the powers of overseers of the poor," 
it was provided among other things that 

Every person who hath lived one year in any town or place, 
shall be deemed an inhabitant of such town or place, unless some 
time within such year, and before the expiration thereof, such 
person shall have been by warrant from the selectmen of such 
town or place directed to any constable thereof (or other person 
to whom they may think proper to direct the same) warned to 
depart from such town or place, and the said warrant and the 
return of such warning made by the person to whom directed, 
within the time aforesaid, returned to the clerk of the court of 
general sessions of the peace in the same county, and put on file, 
which shall always be done by the said clerk, and a minute 
thereon made of the time of receiving the same. And the said 
clerk shall receive six pence therefor. Provided always, That nothing 
in this section contained, shall be construed to extend to persons 
committed, or lawfully restrained in any town, or to such as shall 
be sent for education, or to any physician to be healed or cured. 

Then followed a provision that the taxing or assess- 
ing of any person (warned to depart) for such lands, 
property, and ratable estate as he might have used, 
occupied, or possessed, during his residence in such 
town, should not be considered or construed as en- 
titling the person so taxed or assessed to the rights and 
privileges of an inhabitant, or operate in any wise to 
"injure or lessen the full force, validity and effect of 
such warning." t 

* Perpetual Laws of New Hampshire, Melcher's edition, 1789, p. 160. 
t New Hampshire Laws, 1792, Melcher's edition, p. 304. See also New 
Hampshire Laws, 1805, p. 300. 



Warning Out in New England 95 

On December 20, 1797, an Act was passed with 
regard to the removal of persons of vicious character 
having no visible means of support and no settle- 
ment. 

This provided that such persons might by warrant 
from the selectmen directed to a constable be warned 
to depart from a town or place, and, if they neglected 
to do so for the space of fourteen days after warning, 
they might be carried to the town or place in which 
they were last settled. And, if any person so removed 
should voluntarily return to the town from which they 
were first carried and remain seven days, they might 
be apprehended by order of a justice, and on convic- 
tion the justice might "sentence him or her to be 
publicly whipped, not exceeding ten stripes." The 
form of warning was set forth in the statute, and 
stated that the person was "of vicious character, or 
has no visible means of support," * as the case may 
be. 

This Act, it will be observed, made a distinction 
between persons who were merely warned to depart 
to prevent their obtaining a settlement and those who 
were of vicious character or had no visible means of 
support. 

The practice under these Acts is shown by the fol- 
lowing cases: — 

In Littleton it was the practice to warn out the new- 
comers, whether desirable persons or not. This record 
shows the form of procedure: — 

State of New Hampshire { To Levi Aldrich Constable of 
Grafton ss ' the town of Littleton Greeting. 

In the name of the State You are Required to go forthwith 
to the house of Samuel Underwood now residing in this town 
and warn the following persons (viz.) Samuel Underwood, Beulah 
* New Hampshire Laws, 1805, p. 306. 



96 Warning Out in New England 

Underwood, Junior Israel Underwood to Depart out of Town 
(as they came in without leave) and Trespass no more in said 
Town. Given under our hands this 29th day of August 1769. 

Robert Charlton ) 
Eben Pingree / Selectmen. 
Ansal Hatch ) 

In Henniker all persons coming into town were 
warned to depart within a specified time. It is said, 
however, that but little attention was paid to the warn- 
ing, and in most cases it was hoped there would be no 
attention paid to it. Occasionally, however, persons 
took the matter seriously and left the town.* 

In Peterboro warning out was practised against all 
new-comers. The town record shows that December 
23, 1763, a warning was issued and served, as follows: — 

Province of 



T., TT I December ye 23d 1763 

New Hampshire ) 

To James Templeton Constable of this town of Peterborough 
in His Majesty's name, we command you forthwith warn Jean 
Culberson now in this place forthwith to Depart out of this 
town, hereof fail not as you will answer the Contrary At yr 
Perill. Thomas Cunningham Alexr Robbe Hugh Gregg Select- 
men, etc. 

December ye 24th 1763, according to the within request, I have 
Warned Jean Culberson forthwith to depart out of this town 
etc. 

James Templeton, Constable for the Town of Peterborough, f 

In Rindge warning out was practised as early as 
January, 1769, the warrant of warning being issued 
before the Revolution in his Majesty's name and served 
and recorded upon the town books. 

On June 12, 1776, the town records show that £2 
135. 4c?. were paid to a constable of the town "for warn- 
ing forty persons out of the town," and that in October 

* Cogswell, History of Henniker, p. 342. 
t Smith, History of Peterboro, p. 176. 



Warning Out in New England 97 

of the same year 10s. Sd. was paid for warning eight 
persons out of the town. In 1772 and 1773 fifty -nine 
persons were warned out by Constable Jonathan 
Parker, Jr. The learned historian of the town, Ezra 
S. Stearns, says that many of the persons who were 
warned to depart became prosperous in business, 
honored as townsmen, and their descendants have 
been useful and esteemed citizens.* 

In Antrim, beginning in 1783, warning out was prac- 
tised generally, a warrant from the selectmen directed 
to the persons ordered to depart being served by con- 
stable and returned and recorded upon the town rec- 
ords. The historian of the town alludes to this custom 
as a curiosity at the present time, and says that not- 
withstanding the warning the parties might remain, 
and generally were desired to remain, only, in case 
they became a public charge, the town where they had 
resided was held for their support. And then he adds, 
"Happily this law has long since passed away."t 

In Exeter it was ordered in 1665 that all persons 
who should hire any servant should be chargeable for 
his support "if it happened that he should be lamed 
or any way unserviceable made in work during the 
time for which he was hired, so the town may be free 
from such charges." 

In August, 1671, it was ordered 

That no man shall receive any person or persons into town 
without the consent of the Selectmen, or security to free the town 
from any charge that may ensue thereby, upon twenty shillings 
a month forfeiture; and that no man shall come to inhabit, by 
purchase or otherwise, without the consent of the Selectmen upon 
the same penalty.! 

* Stearns, History of Rindge, p. 88 et seq. 

t Cochrane, History of Antrim, N.H., p. 68. 

t Bell, History of Exeter, p. 54. 



98 Warning- Out in New En(:jland 



'& 



In Walpole, in 1772, the town voted 

That the constable warn out of town every person that comes 
in that has no estate in town. 

And this was made one of the duties of the eon- 
stable for many years thereafter.* 

The same practice was followed in Alstead and 
many other towns, especially after the Revolutionary 
War, when many persons came to dwell in the new 
towns in the Connecticut Valley and in the northern 
part of the State. 

* Aldrich, History of Walpole, p. 43. 



CHAPTER VI. 

Rhode Island Colony and State Laws as to Inhabitancy, 
Relief of the Poor, Town Settlement, etc.— Maine 
and Vermont State Laws as to Warning Out, Inhabi- 
tancy, Settlement, Relief of the Poor, etc. 

The early settlers in Rhode Island asserted the 
same right to exclude new-comers. When Roger Will- 
iams in 1638 conveyed to twelve of his companions 
the land which had been conveyed to him by the 
Indian chiefs Cononicus and Miontinomi, on the Paw- 
tuxet River, the grant was to share with him "and 
such others as the major part of us shall admit into 
the same fellowship of vote with us." 

The subsequent compact for the establishment of 
the town of Providence was upon the same principle. 
It was as follows: — 

We whose names are hereunder, desirous to inhabit in the town 
of Providence, do promise to subject ourselves in active or pas- 
sive obedience to all such orders or agreements as shall be made 
for public good of the body, in an orderly way by the major assent 
of the present inhabitants, masters of families, incorporated to- 
gether into a town fellowship, and such others as they shall admit 
unto them, only in civil things.* 

The same method was followed in the settlement of 
Aquidneck, Rhode Island, in 1638. In the tow^n com- 
pact made in 1640 five men w^ere appointed to dis- 
pose of the town lands, but they were required first 
to notify the inhabitants lest any objection should 
exist to the new-comer, and any inhabitant could ob- 
ject and require the question of admitting the stranger 
to be determined by a town meeting. 

Conveyances were made in simple form w^ithout the 

* Arnold, History of Rhode Island, Vol. I, pp. 100, 103. 



100 Warning Out in New England 

voluminous provisions of recitals and covenants, etc., 
in modern deeds of land, and were read in an open town 
meeting, and were valid only when approved by vote of 
the meeting,* 

It was agreed in the form of government at Provi- 
dence the 27th of the 5th mo. in the yeare (so called) 
1640 (1637) in the second statement as follows: — 

We have with one consent agreed that for the disposeing, of 
those lands that shall be disposed belonging to this towne of 
Providence to be in the whole Inhabitants by the choise of five 
men for generall disposeall, to be betrusted with disposeall of lands 
and also of the townes Stocke, and all Generall things and not to 
receive in any six dayes as townesmen, but first to give the In- 
habitants notice to consider if any have just cause to shew against 
the receiving of him as you can apprehend, and to receive none 
but such as subscribe to this our determination. Also, we agree 
that if any of our neighbours doe apprehend himselfe wronged by 
these or any of these 5 disposers, that at the Generall towne meet- 
ing he may have a tryall.f 

At a generall meeting of the town of Portsmouth 
"upon publicke notice on the 3d month, 13 day, 1638,'* 
it was 

Ordered, that none shall be received as inhabitants or Freemen, 
to build or plant upon the Island but such as shall be received 
in by the consent of the Bodye, and do submitt to the Government 
that is or shall be established, according to the word of God.| 

At the Generall Court assembled at Newport on the 
19th of September, 1642, it was 

Ordered, that no person or persons shall make any sale of his 
lands (in or belonging to our Jurisdiction) to any other Jurisdic- 
tion, or person therein, vnless that that Jurisdiction or person 
shall be subject to the Government here established, vpon paine 
of forfeiture of the said lands so proffered. § 

* Arnold, History of Rhode Island, Vol. I, pp. 9, 121, HI. 
t Rhode Island Colony Records, 1636 to 1663, Vol. I, p. 28. 
t Ilnd., p. .53. 
§ Ibid., p. 126. 



Warning Out in New England 101 

One of the acts and orders made and agreed upon 
at the General Court of Election in Rhode Island, on 
the 19th, 20th, and 21st of May, 1647, for the Colony 
and Province of Providence, was : — 

It is agreed and ordered, by this present Assembly, that each 
Towne shall provide carefully for the reliefe of the poore, to main- 
tayne the impotent, and to employ the able, and shall appoint an 
overseer for the same purpose. See 43 Eliz. 2.* 

In 1682 it was provided by law that the town council 
could prevent any one becoming an inhabitant unless 
sufficient security satisfactory to them was given by 
townsmen that the person admitted should not become 
a public charge. In the Laws of Rhode Island of 1798 
*'An Act providing for the Relief, Support, Employ- 
ment and Removal of the Poor" provided that: — 

Every town in this State shall be holden to relieve and support 
all poor and indigent persons, lawfully settled therein, whenever 
they shall stand in need thereof, f 

Section 15 of this Act provided: — 

That in case any tavern-keeper, inn-holder, victualler, or any 
other person whosoever, inhabiting in any town within this State, 
shall entertain or keep in his or her house any single person or 
family, being strangers, for more than one whole week from the 
time of their coming into such town, without giving notice thereof 
in writing to the President of the Town-Council, such person so 
offending shall forfeit and pay a fine of seven dollars for every 
such offence, to be recovered by the Town-Treasurer of such town, 
before any Justice or Warden, to and for the use of such town. 

As late as 1727 the town councils had by statute power 
to refuse inhabitancy to any stranger, even if security 
was given, t 

In that portion of Massachusetts, now the State of 

* Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, 1636-1663, Vol. I, pp. 184, 185. 

tSee Rhode Island Laws, 1727, 1741, 1748, 1765, 1798. 

t Stokes, The Finances and Administration of Providence, p. 74. 



102 Warning Out in New England 

Maine, then commonly known as the District of Maine, 
warning out was practised until the State of Maine 
was created in 1819. The following instances illustrate 
the practice: — 

In Sanford, incorporated in 1768, warning out began 
to be practised as early as 1771, and appears to have 
been used against all new-comers. The first warrant 
was as follows: — 

York/s Sanford June ye 28: 1771. 

Paletiah Tingle Wereas you have come into this Towne 
Withoute Leav of the Towne This is to warne you forthwith 
to Departe out of this Towne forthwith for Wee Disowne you for 
an inhabitant.* 

In Belfast, incorporated in 1773, new-comers were 
warned out as early as 1775, and the practice was con- 
tinued as late as 1798. f 

In Gorham warning out was practised as early as 
1791, a warning being then recorded warning out four- 
teen persons w^ith their families "who have lately 
come into this towne for the purpose of abiding therein 
not having obtained the towns consent therefor."! 

In Union in 1787 it was voted that the selectmen 
should warn out all persons they might deem it 
necessary to warn, and in December of the same 
year and in 1789 warning out warrants were issued 
and served upon sundry new-comers. § 

In Thomaston in 1785 seventeen persons were warned 
out, including, as it afterwards proved, many who 
became valuable and thrifty citizens. It is said by 
Eaton that the practice of w^arning out became gen- 

* Emery, History of Sanford, p. 225. 
t Williamson, History of Belfast, p. 133. 
t McLellan, History of Gorham, p. 334. 
§ Sibley, History of Union, pp. 270, 271. 



Warning Out in New England 103 

eral throughout the State toward all new-comers with- 
out discrimination.* 

In Camden the selectmen were authorized to warn 
out all new-comers who had not been admitted by 
the town authorities to be inhabitants. The record 
shows that January 2, 1792, twenty -two persons 
were thus warned out of town. Among the number 
were several w^ho afterwards became among the first 
citizens of the town.j 

In Castine one of the first acts of the town, after 
its incorporation in 1796, was to warn a woman to 
depart, and a few weeks later to warn out five other 
persons. These are said to have been the only cases 
of warning out in Castine, which was created from a 
portion of the town of Penobscot, but the records of 
Penobscot show that warning out was practised there. 
In 1790 fifty persons were warned to depart the town. J 

In Durham, incorporated 1789, the town at once 
began to warn out all new-comers, and continued the 
practice for some time. Three persons were warned 
out in 1791, but remained and were good citizens. 
The following from the town records of 1793 illus- 
trates the course of procedure: — 

Cumberland Ss to Benjamin Vining Constable for the said 

Town of Durham Greeting 

You are in the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts 
directed To warn, and give notice unto Samuel Jordan, Jede- 
diah Jordan, Daniel Roberson, Paul Dyer of Cape Elizabeth 
. . . John Stackpole, Jeremiah Smith, James Johnson of Harps- 
well, Daniel Harmon of Standish, Elias Davis of Bakerstown, 
Ezekiel Turner of Freeport, and Samuel Proctor of Plymouth 
Labourers in the Town of Durham and County of Cumberland, 

* Eaton, History of Thomaston, p. 172. 

t Camden Town Records, pp. 22, 28, 39, cited by Locke, History of Camden, 
p. 69. 

J Wheeler, History of Castine, pp. 69, 74. 



104 Warning Out in New England 

Which above named persons, has lately come into this Town 
for the Purpose of abiding therein, not having obtained the 
Towns consent. Therefore that they depart the Limits thereof, 
With their Children And others under their care, if any they 
have, within fifteen days. And of this precept, with your doings 
thereon, you are to make Return into the office of the Town, 
within Twenty days next Coming, that such further proceedings 
may be had in the premises, As the law directs. . . . Given under 
our hands and Seal, at Durham aforesaid this 25 day of Feb- 
ruary A.D. 1793. 

Nathaniel Garish ) Select 
Aaron Osgood ) men 

Attest Martin Rourk, Town Clerk 

Pursuant to the within Warrant, I have warned those persons 
within mentioned To Depart the Limits of the Town As soon as 
may be, or within fifteen days, from the date thereof. 

Benjamin Vining Constable 
A true copy Martin Rourk T Clerk 

Durham, March ye 14, 1793.* 

This warning out of all new-comers is probably 
to be accounted for by the fact that there was much 
immigration into the new and poor towns at that 
time. 

One provision of the Constitution of Maine, adopted 
October 29, 1819, was that all laws then in force, not 
repugnant to the Constitution then adopted, should 
remain in force until altered or repealed by the Legis- 
lature, or until they should expire by their own limi- 
tation, f 

In 1821 a Settlement Act was passed, differing 
somewhat from the Massachusetts Act. It did not 
provide for warning out in any form, and, as the Mas- 
sachusetts law did not then provide for warning, there 
was never any statute providing for warning out in 

* Stackpole, History of Durham, p. 24. 

t Constitution of Maine, Article 10, Section 3. 



Warning Out in New England 105 

the State of Maine. The Act of 1821 omitted the 
provision in the Massachusetts Act for the settlement 
of settled and ordained ministers, but provided that a 
person could be admitted an inhabitant of any town 
at a town meeting the warrant for which contained 
an article for that purpose. The further provisions 
of the Act were in substance: — 

1. That all persons dwelling and having their homes 
in any unincorporated places, when the same should be 
incorporated into a town, should thereby gain a legal 
settlement in the town. 

2. That legal settlements, in case of new towns or 
division of towns, should be in the new town within 
the boundaries of which the persons actually dwelt 
and had their homes. 

3. That any minor who should serve an apprentice- 
ship to any lawful trade for four years in any town, 
and actually set up his trade therein within one year 
after the expiration of such four years, and was then 
twenty-one years of age, should thereby have a settle- 
ment in such town. 

4. That any person twenty-one years of age, who 
should reside in any town for five years together, and 
not during that time, directly or indirectly, receive 
supplies or support as a pauper from any town, should 
gain a settlement. 

5. That any person resident in a town at the date of 
the passage of the Act, who should not within one 
year previous to that date have received support or 
supplies from some town as a pauper, should be deemed 
to have a settlement in the town where he then dwelt 
and had his home. 

The Act also declared that every legal settlement 
when gained should continue until lost or defeated by 
gaining a new one, and that, upon gaining such new 



106 Warning Out in New England 

settlement, all former settlements should be defeated 
and lost.* 

In Vermont, which was an independent State until 
1791, the right of towns to exclude strangers was rec- 
ognized and established in 1787 by the following Act 
of the General Assembly: — 

An Act for the ordering and disposing of transient persons. 

Be it enacted, and it is hereby enacted, by the representatives 
of the freemen of the State of Vermont, in General Assembly met, 
and by the authority of the same, that the select-men of each 
respective town in this State, shall be, and are hereby, authorised 
and impowered to warn any transient person (residing in such 
town, that is not of a quiet and peaceable behaviour, or is, in their 
opinion, like to be chargable to such town) to depart out of such 
town, except such person does obtain a vote of the inhabitants 
of such town, in legal town meeting, to remain in such town; and 
if any such person or persons, being so warned, do not leave such 
town within twenty days after such warning, then one or more of 
said select-men may make application to an assistant or justice of 
the peace, who is hereby impowered to issue his warrant to the 
sheriff or constable to take such person or persons, and transport 
him or them to the next town, towards the place where such per- 
son was last an inhabitant; — in the same manner to be transported 
to the place where such person or persons were inhabitants last, 
or in the same way, out of this State, if he be not an inhabitant 
thereof; and all such expence shall be paid by the person or per- 
sons so warned, if of ability, but if he is not of ability, to be paid 
by such town. 

Provided always, that no person shall be subject to such 
warning, after he or she has lived in such town one year. 

Be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that 
if any transient person or persons shall be taken sick or lame, in 
any town in this State; whoever shall keep any such person or 
persons (if such transient, sick or lame person or persons be not of 
sufficient ability) shall defray all such expense, until complaint 
thereof be by him made to the select-men of such town; after 

* Laws of the State of Maine, 18!21, Chap. 122. 



Warning Out in New England 107 

which, such select-men shall provide for such transient, sick, or 
lame person, according to law.* 

At the same session an Act was passed for main- 
taining and supporting the poor. This Act first pro- 
vided "that each town in this State shall take care 
of, support, and maintain their own poor." 

And the Act also provided 
that if any person or persons shall come to live in any town in this 
State, and be there received and entertained, by the space of 
twelve months; and if, by sickness, lameness, or the like, he or 
they come to want relief, every such person or persons shall be pro- 
vided for by that town wherein he or they were so long entertained, 
at said town's own proper cost and charge, unless such person or 
persons by law are to be provided for by some particular person 
or persons; or unless such person or persons wanting relief, have, 
within the said twelve months, been warned as the law directs, 
to depart and leave the place: and if such warning be given, and 
the same be certified to the next superior court to be held in the 
same county, the said court shall and may otherwise order the 
defraying the charge arising about such indigent person or per- 
sons.! 

March 9, 1787, an Act was passed entitled "An 
Act providing for and ordering transient, idle, impotent 
and poor persons." 

This Act provided "that each town in this State 
shall take care of, support and maintain its own poor." 

And also provided 
"that no persons shall gain a settlement in any town in this 
State, and be liable to be supported thereby, unless such person 
was born therein, or has owned or shall own estate in such town 
of the value of two hundred pounds clear of all demands against 
him, or her, or of the j^early value of ten pounds." + 

March 3, 1797, an Act was passed "defining what 
shall be deemed and adjudged a legal settlement, and 

* Vermont Laws, February, 1779. Vermont State Papers, p. 315. 
t Vermont State Papers, pp. 378, 379. 
I Statutes of Vermont, edition 1791. 



108 Warning Out in New England 

for the support of the poor," etc., indexed under the 
head of "Inhabitancy." 

The first section of that Act provided for obtaining 
settlement as follows: — 

Section 1. It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly 
of the State of Vermont, That every person who shall purchase 
a freehold estate of the value of one hundred dollars, and shall 
have bona fide paid therefor, and shall actually occupy and im- 
prove the same for the term of one whole year; or shall actually 
and bona fide have rented and occupied a tenement of the yearly 
value of twenty dollars or upwards, for the term of two whole 
years, and actually paid such rent; and every person who shall 
inhabit in any town or place within this state, and shall for him- 
self, or on his own account, have executed any public office or 
charge in such town or place, during one whole year, or shall 
have been charged with and paid his or her share of the public 
rates or taxes of such town or place for the space of two years; 
and every person who shall have been bound an apprentice or 
servant by indenture, or by any deed, contract or writing not 
indented, and shall in consequence of such binding, have served 
a term not less than three years next preceding the time of such 
apprentice's arriving at the age of twenty-one years, if a male, 
or at the age of eighteen years, if a female, in such town or place, 
shall be deemed and adjudged to have attained a legal settlement 
in such town or place; and every other healthy able bodied per- 
son coming and residing within this state, and being of peaceable 
behaviour, shall be deemed and adjudged to be legally settled in 
the town or place in which he or she shall have first resided for 
the space of one whole year; and every bastard child shall be 
deemed and adjudged to be settled in the town or place of the last 
legal settlement of his or her mother. 

The Act contained provisions for ascertaining by the 
judgment of two justices of the peace whether new- 
comers were likely to become chargeable as poor to 
the town, and, if so, for transporting them out of the 
town, but it contained no provision authorizing other 
new-comers to be warned to leave the town.* 

* Laws of Vermont, 1798. Chap. 18. 



Warning Out in New England 109 

The first section of this Act was repealed November 6, 
1801, by 

An act in addition to an act entitled "An act defining what 
shall be deemed and adjudged a legal Settlement, and for the 
support of the poor, for designating the duties and powers of 
the overseers of the poor; and for the punishment of idle and 
disorderly persons," and for repealing part of the same. 

Section 1. 
It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of 
Vermont, That whenever any person, or persons, shall come and 
reside within any town in this state, the select men of such town, 
may at their discretion, warn such person, or persons, to depart 
said town, which warning shall be directed to either constable of 
said town, and be in the following form, viz. 

State of Vermont. 

ss. To either Constable of A. in the county 
of B. Greeting. 

You are hereby required to summon C. D. now residing in A. 
to depart said town. Hereof fail not, but of this precept, and 
your doings herein, due return make according to law. — Given 
under our hands, at A. this day of 

A.D. 18 

E. F. ] 

G. H. y Select men of A. 
I. K. ) 

Which precept shall be served on such person, or persons, com- 
ing and residing as aforesaid, by such constable, in the same 
manner as is provided for the service of writs of summons, in the 
twenty-sixth section of the act, entitled "An act constituting 
the supreme and county courts, defining their power, and regulat- 
ing judicial proceedings"; which precept the said constable shall 
return, with his proceedings thereon, to the town clerk of such 
town, within eight days after serving the same, which precept 
and return it shall be the duty of the town clerk to enter on the 
records of said town. 

Sec. 2. And it is hereby further enacted. That each and every 
person removing into, and residing within any town in this state, 
who shall be warned as is prescribed in the preceding section of 
this act, shall not be deemed and adjudged to have gained a legal 



110 Warning Out in New England 



to' 



settlement in such town, unless such person or persons, is or are 
discharged from such warning, by a vote of said town, in a legal 
town meeting warned for said purpose. 

Sec. 3. Provided nevertheless, And it is hereby further en- 
acted, That if any person, or persons, removing into, and residing 
within any town in this state, shall by the iidiabitants of such 
town, be chosen into either of the offices of select men, town clerk, 
constable, grand juror or lister, and serve the town in such capac- 
ity one whole year, he or they shall be considered as gaining a legal 
settlement in such town, any thing in this act to the contrary not- 
withstanding. 

Sec. 4. And it is hereby further enacted. That all and every 
person coming into, and residing within any town in this state, 
who shall not be warned agreeably to the first section of this act, 
within one year after he or she removes into such town, shall be 
deemed and adjudged to have attained a legal settlement in such 
town. 

And whereas difficulties have arisen in procuring two justices 
of the peace, not inhabitants of the towns concerned, to hear and 
determine certain causes, and issue certain warrants and orders, 
as mentioned in the act, to which this is an addition: 

Therefore, 

Sec. 5. It is hereby further enacted. That any two justices 
of the peace of the county, in which any town lies, which shall 
take any advantage of said act, shall to all intents and purposes, 
be competent to hear and determine any cause mentioned in said 
act, and to issue any warrant or order therein specified, whether 
they be inhabitants of such town or not, any thing in said act to 
the contrary notwithstanding. 

Sec. 6. And it is hereby further enacted. That if any person 
who shall be removed from any town in this state, as provided in 
the third section of the act, to which this is an addition, shall 
return to reside within the same, without the permission of the 
select men of such town, and be thereof convicted, he, she or they 
shall be whipped, not exceeding ten stripes, at the discretion of 
the justice of the peace before whom such trial shall be had. 

Sec. 7. And it is hereby further enacted. That the first sec- 
tion of the act to which this is an addition, be, and the same is 
hereby repealed. 
Passed November 6, 1801.* . 

* Acts and Laws of the State of Vermont at their Session at Neivbury, in Octo- 
ber, 1801, p. 8. 



Warning Out in New England 111 

The practice of warning out under these Acts is shown 
by the following cases: — 

In Cornwall it was the custom for many years to 
serve a summons of warning out upon every new- 
comer, which was recorded with the officer's returns 
upon the town books. These warnings cover many 
pages of the records.* 

In Newbury warning out was practised generally 
with regard to all new-comers. The selectmen issued 
a warrant, which the constables served and returned, 
and it was then recorded on the town records. In 
the first book of town proceedings there are 112 such 
warnings recorded, the first being January 5, 1787, 
the last November 12, 1816, when the law authorizing 
warning out was repealed. One of these warrants 
includes twenty -four different families.! 

In Hartford it was customary to warn out all new- 
comers, and hundreds of families were thus legally 
warned to depart. The last warnings were in 1817. J 

Warning out appears to have been most frequently 
practised in the new towns, probably because there 
were more new-comers in those tow^ns, and the towns 
themselves were less able to bear the expense of sup- 
porting such persons as might become in need of 
public support. This was especially the case in those 
portions of Vermont along the Connecticut River into 
which a large immigration took place just after the 
War of the Revolution. 

The process of warning out produced three kinds of 
fees to town officers: first, a fee to the selectmen for 
making the warrant; second, the fee to the constable 

* Matthews, History of Cornwall, p. 309. 

t Wells, History of Newbury, Vermont, p. 286. 

X Tucker, History of Hartford, Vermont, p. 305. 



112 Warning Out in New England 

for serving the warrant; and, third, a fee to the town 
clerk for recording the warrant and return of service.* 

In Rockingham, which includes Bellows Falls, warn- 
ings out were very numerous. 

July 24, 1769, it was voted in town meeting that 
"all Strangers who Com to Inhabit in said town Not 
being Freeholders, be warned out of town."t 

Pages of the town's records are filled by the returns 
of warrants warning people out of town. The warrants 
specified the names of all members of the family, 
sometimes eight or ten in number. One warrant 
contained the names of fifty persons. In 1808 thirty- 
one families were warned out, and in 1809 twenty-six. 

The warnings of the warrants stated that they were 
made on complaint made to the selectmen. The last 
of these warnings was October 10, 1817. 

In this town every new-comer, or stranger, was 
warned out under the vote of the town requiring all 
persons that "do come into the town to be at once 
warned out." Of course, few people went because 
they were warned out. The only effect of the warn- 
ing was that the persons warned could not afterwards 
obtain a settlement in the town so as to become 
chargeable to it for relief, unless they were elected to 
some town office, t 

The form of warrant used in Rockingham was as 
follows : — 

State of Vermont, ) To either Constable of Rockingham in 
Windham County ss. ) the County of Windham Greeting: 

You are hereby required to summon Samuel March & Tab- 
atha March his Wife & Hannah March Prudence March Abigail 
March & Sarah March now residing in Rockingham to depart 

* History of Newbury, Vermont, p. 28C. 

t History oj Rockingham, Vermont, p. 100 et seq. 

X Thomas B. Peck, Vital Records of Rockingham, Vermont, Boston, 1908. 



Warning Out in New England 113 

said Town. Hereof fail not but of this precept and your doings 

thereon doe return make according to law. 

Given under our hands at Rockingham this 8th Day of May 

Anno Domini, 1805. 

Elijah Knight, | Selectmen 
QuARTUs Morgan, > of 

David Wood, ) Rockingham 

At Rockingham in the County of Windham this 18th Day of 
May 1805 I served this summons by leaving a true and attested 
copy of the same with the within Samuel March's Wife at his 
Dwelling house in said Rockingham with this my return thereon. 

Elljah Read, Constable. 

On November 4, 1817, an Act was passed prescrib- 
ing the different ways in which legal settlement could 
be obtained in a town, and warning out to prevent a 
settlement ceased. Among other provisions retained 
in the law, however, was this: — 

Any person may be admitted to a legal settlement in any town 
by vote of the town in a town meeting legally warned and holden 
for that purpose.* 

This provision was embodied in the Laws of Vermont, 
1824, page 382, and is found in the Compiled Statutes 
of Vermont in 1859, p. 128, as follows: — 

Any person that shall be admitted an inhabitant by the town at 
any legal meeting held under a warning, which shall contain an arti- 
cle for that purpose, shall thereby acquire a legal settlement therein. 

After the Act of 1817 there was no more warning 
out in Vermont, but the previous records of such 
warnings are of much value as fixing the times when 
the persons warned must have come into the towns. 

* Laws of Vermont, 1825, Chap. 47, No. 3, p. 381. 



CHAPTER VII. 

The Length of Time Warning Out was practised. — Effect 
OF Warning Out, how avoided. — Value of Warning Out 
Records. — Summary as to Reasons for Warning Out, 
etc. 

It will be seen by examination of the statutes and 
records from which I have made such copious extracts 
that warning out was practised by the towns in Mas- 
sachusetts from the early settlement of the colony, 
first, under the general power of towns to admit or 
exclude new-comers from inhabitancy, and then under 
the colony laws until the passage of the Settlement 
Act in 1793. It was also practised in the Plymouth 
Colony from the early settlement of that colony until 
its union with Massachusetts, and was also author- 
ized b}^ the Articles of Confederation between the 
colonies of Massachusetts, Plymouth, and Connecti- 
cut in 1672. The original colony statutes and the 
Articles of Confederation between the colonies were 
general in their provisions as to warning out, and did 
not fix any specific time within which a person should 
be warned out to prevent his obtaining settlement in 
a town. 

But in 1692 the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed 
an Act which required persons to be warned out within 
three months after they came into a town, to pre- 
vent their gaining a settlement therein. In 1700 
the period within which they might effectively be 
warned out was extended to twelve months, and this 
continued to be the period within which a warning 
must be given to prevent settlement until warning out 
ceased under the Settlement Act of 1793. 

In Connecticut warning out prevailed by custom of 



Warning Out in New England 115 

towns and by the colony statutes from 1669, and in 
1679 it was provided by law that, to be effective against 
obtaining a settlement, persons should be warned out 
within three months from the time they came into 
the town. In 1771 this period was extended to 
twelve months, which continued to be the period until 
warning out ceased as to persons living in Connecticut 
under the Settlement Act of 1796. In New Hamp- 
shire warning out was practised by the towns from the 
early settlement in 1638, and was soon provided for 
by the colony. In 1679 the period within which 
persons must be warned out, to prevent obtaining 
a settlement, was made in three months after they 
came into the town. In 1771 this period was ex- 
tended to twelve months, which continued to be the 
period until the Settlement Act of 1796. In Maine 
the practice and the statutes for warning out were 
those of Massachusetts, of which it was a part until 
1821. In Vermont warning out was authorized in 
1779. The period fixed by the statute within which 
the warning must be given to prevent a settlement 
being obtained was fixed at twelve months after the 
persons came into the town, and this continued to be 
the limit until warning out ceased under the Settle- 
ment Act of 1817. 

Warning out, therefore, was practised in some form 
in Massachusetts for more than one hundred and 
thirty years, in Maine for more than one hundred 
years, in Vermont for thirty-eight years, in New 
Hampshire for one hundred and seventeen years, and 
in Connecticut for one hundred and twenty-seven 

years. 

In Rhode Island warning out was never author- 
ized by statute, but the right to exclude new-comers 
from inhabitancy in towns was always exercised in 



116 Warning Out in New England 

the town councils from the early settlement down to 
as late certainly as 1727. 

The effect of warning out as thus practised upon 
persons who remained in the town after being warned 
was to relieve the town from all obligation to aid them 
if they became poor and in need of help or support. 
They were inhabitants of the town for all purposes 
except being helped if they needed help. They paid 
taxes, they could vote, they could hold office, they 
could perform all the duties of citizenship and of tax- 
payers, and yet, if they had been warned out, they 
could have no help from the town. They might be 
taxed for the support of others who were in need, 
but, when they came to be in need, they were entitled 
to no help from the taxes of the town. They were 
spoken of among their neighbors as persons who had 
"been warned." Persons now living remember when 
those who had been warned out were spoken of in the 
towns among their neighbors as having "been warned." 

The effect of being warned out could be avoided by 
the election or admission of a person warned as an 
inhabitant by a vote of the town. In Connecticut 
it could be avoided, under an Act passed in 1784, by 
the person warned being "appointed to and executing 
some public office." In Vermont, by an Act passed 
in 1801, the effect of warning out could be avoided by 
the person warned being chosen and serving one whole 
year in the office of selectman, town clerk, constable, 
grand juror, or lister. In Massachusetts the effect of 
warning could also be avoided by the person warned 
becoming a settled minister in the town. 

It has been the law in Massachusetts since 1793 that 

Every settled ordained minister of the gospel shall be 
deemed to have acquired a legal settlement in the town where 
he is or may be settled as a minister. 



Warning Out in New England 117 

The effect of this is that, whenever a man becomes a 
settled ordained minister of the gospel in a town, he 
loses any settlement he may previously have had in 
another town and acquires a settlement in that town. 
It is not necessary that a minister who has been once 
regularly ordained in a town, and who afterwards 
becomes a settled minister in another town, should be 
again ordained, or that his engagement in the new town 
should be for any particular time, or that he should be 
inducted into his ministerial office in the new town by 
any particular ceremony.* 

The town records of these warnings out, and the 
statutes by which they were authorized, are of much 
importance in the study of family history. If a town 
record is found of a warning to certain persons to de- 
part from the town, and the statute under which the 
warning must have been given to be effective fixes 
the period within which such warning must have been 
made at three months, it may be fairly assumed that 
the persons came into the town at a time not earlier 
than three months before the warning was given. 
Frequently also these warning out notices were is- 
sued to families and gave the names of the different 
members of the family, so that from them it may be 
fairly assumed that the names comprised all the 
members of the family. Generally, also, the mem- 
bers of the family are named in the order of their 
ages, beginning with the father and mother, and then 
naming from the oldest to the youngest child, so that 
the respective ages of the children may be fairly as- 
sumed therefrom. In some cases these notices state 
the place from which the person or persons came into 
the town, although this is not general in such warn- 

* Bellingham v. Boylston, 4 Cush. 553. 
Leicester v. Fitchburg, 7 Allen, 90. 



118 Warnins: Out in New England 



^to 



ings. Ill a few cases it will be found that the records 
of the warning out notices state the occupation of the 
persons warned, and in all cases the records show the 
names of the selectmen or persons who issued war- 
rants for warnings, of the constables who served 
them, and of the town clerk who recorded them on the 
books of the town, thus in some cases giving infor- 
mation not otherwise obtainable from the town records. 

If we judge these warning out statutes by the stand- 
ards of the present time, they seem to have been 
strange and unjust. Now that persons are at liberty 
to move into and live in any municipality, we cannot 
quite understand why it was either necessary or right 
to exclude them from coming into and living in any 
town in the old times, nor can we understand why, if 
persons did come into any town and make it their 
home, they could properly be deprived of the benefit 
of being relieved by the town in case they became 
poor and in need of help. 

But if we consider the condition in which the early 
settlers were placed, and especially the fact that each 
town was by the ancient law responsible for the sup- 
port of such of its inhabitants as became poor and in 
need of help, we see that this obligation, as well as the 
obligation of the towns at that time for the good con- 
duct of their inhabitants, made it necessary that the 
towns should be able to exclude from inhabitancy 
persons whom they did not desire to receive as in- 
habitants. 

This was the fundamental law underlying the es- 
tablishment of towns in New England, and was the 
only rule upon which in the sparsely settled condition 
of the country at that time the poor could be provided 
for at first. The towns were united into effective 
colony and State government by slow degrees, as 



Warning Out in New England 119 

roads and bridges were built, means of intercom- 
munication were opened between the towns, and 
trade and commerce increased throughout the colonies 
and the early States. The only efficient method of 
taking care of the poor at that time was by requiring 
the towns to take care of them. In the very beginning 
the towns were able to exclude persons from inhab- 
itancy whom they did not want by refusing to give 
them lands, and by refusing to allow those to whom 
lands had been granted to sell them to others whom 
the towns did not wish to admit as inhabitants. 
Later the towns sought to protect themselves against 
liability for the support of new inhabitants by requir- 
ing them to give security, usually by a bond from some 
other persons, to indemnify the town if it should ever 
be required to support the new-comers. This was 
carried so far that physicians to whom persons from 
out of the town came for treatment were required to 
become responsible to the town for any liability to 
support such persons if they became poor. But, as 
the population increased and means of communication 
multiplied, people came into towns and lived, and be- 
came inhabitants in spite of these precautions. 

People came into towns notwithstanding these re- 
straints and without giving security. Some of them 
became "sick or lame" to use the language of the law 
of the time, and they needed help. How were they to 
be helped.'^ The colony law said: "The towns must 
help them. If the towns admit people as inhabi- 
tants, they must take care of them if they need help." 
The towns said : "We have not admitted them. They 
have come in without our consent. AVe do not want 
them, but we cannot keep them out, and there is no 
way by which we can effectively protect ourselves 
against liability for their support if they come in. The 



120 Warning Out in New England 

burden is likely to be too great for us to bear in many 
towns." Then it was provided by colony law that, 
if the towns warned new-comers to depart within 
three months after they came into them, the towns 
should be under no liability for their support, but they 
should be supported at the expense of the colony if 
they came to need support. The towns soon com- 
plained that three months was too short a period with- 
in which to warn out new-comers, because knowledge 
of their coming in did not in all cases come to the towns 
during that time. Then the colony law was changed 
to make the period within which the new-comer could 
be warned out twelve months, and, to make it certain 
where the responsibility for the support of persons 
who might come to be in need was to rest, the law re- 
quired that these warnings should be recorded on the 
books of the towns or on the records of the court. 

These warning out statutes were, as it will be seen, 
only a step in the economic development of the colony 
and the state from a condition where towns could prac- 
tically exclude new-comers, and therefore ought to be 
responsible if they did not, to a condition where they 
could not practically exclude them, and, therefore, 
ought not to be held responsible simply because such 
persons came to live in the towns. The statutes were 
a part of the growth of the poor-laws of New England, 
which were afterwards put into form in the various 
settlement acts or laws of which I have spoken, pro- 
viding how settlements could be obtained in towns. 

There was a reason for these warning out statutes 
and for warning people out under them. The people 
were poor, the towns were sparsely populated, their 
people for a long time had little property, if any, except 
that which they produced from the soil or wrested from 
the sea. The average well-to-do person prior to 1800 



Warnins: Out in New England 121 



^t> -^wv. xw a.,x^,T -^^^b 



did not have an estate equal to more than $750 at the 
present time. I do not mean by this the average of all 
persons, but the average of all persons who were con- 
sidered well off. These people were naturally unwill- 
ing to be burdened with the responsibility of support 
for anybody who might come into the town, whether 
responsible or irresponsible. In addition to this there 
was at that time a large emigration of poor people 
from the Old World, and there was the flotsam and jet- 
sam of a degenerate population coming up from the 
islands of the New World and flocking into the towns 
and villages of New England. It was right that these 
persons should become chargeable to the colony rather 
than to the towns. Warning out accomplished this 
purpose, and these statutes, as applied to the condi- 
tions under which they were passed, were reasonable 
and proper. 



CHRONOLOGY. 

1497. Cabots' Discovery of North America. 

1583. Gilbert's Possession of Newfoundland. 

1601. First English Poor Law. 

1602. Gosnold landed in New England. 
1606. James L, Virginia Patent. 

1620. James I., Grant to "Council established at Plymouth, 
in the County of Devon, for the Planting, Ruling, and 
Governing of New England in America." 

1629. Charles I. grants Massachusetts Bay Charter. 

1629. Charles I. grants New-Plimouth Charter. 

1631. Grant to Connecticut Colony. 

1638. Roger Williams's Settlement in Rhode Island. 

1671. First Plymouth Warning Out Law. 

1673. First Connecticut Warning Out Law. 

1692. First Massachusetts Warning Out Statute. 

1718. First Warning Out Act in New Hampshire. 

1787. First Warning Out Act in Vermont. 

1793. First Massachusetts Settlement iVct. 

1796. First Connecticut Settlement Act. 

1796. First Settlement Act in New Hampshire. 

1817. First Vermont Settlement Act. 

1821. First Settlement Act in Maine. 



INDEX. 



Act of Settlement, see Settlement 
Act. 

Adams, Samuel, admitted, 36. 

Admission of inhabitants, see In- 
habitancy. 

Aldrich, Levi, constable at Little- 
ton, N.H., 95. 

"Allotters," meaning of, 19. 

Alstead, N.H., warning out in, 1, 
98. 

Andover, Mass., admission and 
inhabitancy in, 37. 

Antrim, N.H., warning out in, 97. 

Aquidneck, R.I., town compact of, 
99. 

Arnoll, Edw., 22. 

Articles of Confederation of 1672 
recognize right of towns to 
warn out, 49, 114. 

Aspewall, William, fined, 20. 

Attleboro, Mass. (1697), vote as to 
warning out, 57. 

Average wealth of well-to-do people 
prior to 1800, 120, 121. 

Avoidance of effect of warning out, 
116, 117. 

Bale, Frances, fined, 41, 
Balstone, William, 20. 
Barrill, George, cooper, 21. 
Barron, Jonathan, selectman of 

Rockingham, Vt., 2. 
Beamsle(a)y, William, 25. 
Belfast, Me., warning out in, 102. 
Bellingham, Richard, bondsman, 

23. 
Bellows, Fanny A., daughter; 

George and Henry Adams, sons; 

Mary, wife of Joseph Bellows, 

2, 3. 
Bellows, Joseph, and family, 

warned out, 2, 3. 
Bellows Falls, Vt., 112. 
Bennett, John, 86. 
Benton, Jacob, and family, warned 

out, 1-3. 
Benton, Hannah, wife; Jacob, Jr., 

Reynold, and Samuel, sons; 

Mabel and Mary, daughters of 

Jacob Benton, 1, 2. 



Bernardston, Mass., warning out 
cases in 1790, 62. 

Bill, Dorothie, a widowe, 21. 

Billerica, Mass., admission to 
inhabitancy in, 35. 

Bird, Thomas, 40. 

Black, Mr. — — , warned out, 27. 

Blague, Henry (or William), bonds- 
man, 24. 

Blesdale, Elizabeth, admitted, 25. 

Blore, Jeams, warned out, 84. 

Boston, Mass.: admission upon se- 
curity, 23; allotments to new- 
comers and conditions of inhabi- 
tancy, 19-21; church relations 
of early settlers, 22; fines im- 
posed for entertaining persons 
without consent of town, 23, 24; 
first case on record of support of 
persons admitted, 24; general 
order (1659) concerning enter- 
tainment of persons not ad- 
mitted as inhabitants, 25; liabil- 
ity of town for support of persons 
admitted, 21; right of common- 
age restricted (May 18, 1648), 
10; strangers to be reported to 
selectmen within 8 daj's, 22, 
23. 

Bracton quoted, 5, Q. 

Bradford, William, and associates, 
receive grant of New Plj^mouth, 
17. 

Bradice, Ralph, admitted, 40. 

Braintree, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 34. 

Bridge, John, 61. 

Bridgewater, Mass., custom of 
warning out in, 62. 

Bridgman, James, 41. 

Brooks, Joe, 85. 

Brooks, Simon, Jr., selectman of 
Alstead, N.H., 2. 

Brown, Daniel, constable at Lex- 
ington, Mass., 61. 

Brown, John, warned out, 43. 

Bruff, William, admitted, 23. 

Bullock, Henry, 29. 

Burges, Francis, 23, 

Burrill, George, cooper, fined, 24. 



124 



Iiidcj 



ex 



Cabot, John and Sebastian, dis- 
covery of North America (1497), 
l*^, 14; receive English royal 
grants in 1495, 14. 

Cambridge, then Newtowne, ad- 
mission to inhabitancv, etc., 30- 

Camden, Me., warning out in, 103. 

Canton, Mass., on warning out, 58. 

Castine, Me., warning out in, 103. 

"Caution," meaning of, 60. 

Chapin, Henry, 28. 

Chapin, Josiah, 28. 

Chapin, , deacon, 28. 

Charles I, grants Massachusetts 
Bay charter, 17; grants New 
Plymouth charter, 17. 

Charlestown, Mass., admission to 
inhabitancy and entertainment 
of strangers in, 29. 

Charlton, Robert, selectman of 
Littleton, N.H., 96. 

Chelmsford, Mass., inhabitancy in, 
35, 36. 

Cheney, William, bondsman, 43. 

Child, Sami, caution entered 
against, 60. 

Chronological table, 122. 

Chub, Mercy, warned out, 42. 

Chub. Thomas, of Beuerlee, 42. 

Church communion and right to 
vote in Massachusetts Colony, 8. 

Church relations of early settlers, 
.22. 

Cole, Samuell, fined, 20. 

Collins, the widow, 39, 40. 

Colony and Province of Providence, 
see Rhode Island. 

Colored persons, Connecticut Act 
to prevent the setting up of 
schools for the instruction of, 81. 

Commonage, right of, and re- 
strictions, 10. 

Connecticut: Act against colored 
schools, 81; admission upon 
surety in, 87; and Indian land 
titles, 13; colony law (1659) 
on restraint of alienation of 
lands to strangers, and warning 
out, 18, 114, 115; first warning 
out law (1673), 65; franchise in, 
8; granted in 1630 to Robert, 
Earl of Warwick, 17; history 
of land titles in, 11, 12; in- 



liabitancv and warning out in, 
63-87. 114-115; Settlement Act 
(1796), 74-80, 115; provisions 
of Act now in force, 82. 

Cononicus and Miontinomi, Indian 
chiefs, 99. 

Cook, Sarah, caution entered 
against, 60. 

Corbee, Goodman, 84. 

Cornnell, Thomas, 20. 

Cornwall, Vt., custom of warning 
out. 111. 

Council, The, established at Plym- 
outh, in the County of Devon, 
for the Planting, Ruling, and 
Governing of New England in 
America, 16, 17. 

Crowe, Mr. , committeeman 

at Yarmouth, 44. 

Crown grants and land titles, 11, 
12. 

Culberson, Jean, warned out, 96. 

Cullymore, Isaacke, carpenter, 
fined, 20. 

Cunningham, Thomas, selectman 
of Peterboro, N.H., 96. 

Curtice, Isack, 85. 

Curtice, Richard, 40. 

Cutting, Daniel, and wife, caution 
entered against, 60. 

Dauenport, , Lieft:, mentioned, 

32. 

Davis, Elias, warned out, 103. 

Davis, John, 35. 

Dedham, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 32, 33; land 
controversy with Indians, 12, 13. 

Deerfield, Mass., inhabitancy in, bd. 

District of Maine, see Maine. 

Dix, Edmand, caution entered 
against, 61. 

Dorchester, Mass., inhabitancy 
conditions in, 38-43; restriction 
of right of commonage, 10, 11. 

Doten, Zepheniah, and family, 
warned out, 45. 

Dudley, Mass., records on warning 
out," 58. 

Durham, Me., warning out in, 
103. 

Duxbury, Mass., inhabitancy con- 
ditions in, 43. 

Dyer, Paul, warned out, 103. 



Index 



125 



Early colony and state laws as to 
inhabitancy and warning out 
in Connecticut. 63-83; Maine, 
104-106; Massachusetts, 46-53; 
New Hampshire, 88-95; Plym- 
outh Colony, 53-55; Rhode Isl- 
and, 99-101; Vermont, 106-110. 

Eaton, of Thomaston, Me., state- 
ment by, 102, 103. 

"Eaton's Code" (1655) and pro- 
visions as to inhabitancy, 87. 

Effect of warning out, how avoided, 
116, 117. 

Eives, Joseph, 85. 

Ellens, Danil, 41. 

Ely, Samuel, admitted, 28. 

Endecott, John, charter member 
of the Massachusetts Bay Col- 
ony, 17. 

Enfield, Conn., order regarding 
sale of land, 84. 

England, admission to inhabitancy 
on same conditions as in New 
England, 26, note*; legal in- 
habitancy in. 9; poor relief in 
mediaeval, 7, 8. 

English: civil institutions and law, 
basis of, 6; common law and 
warning out in New England, 
4, 5; local and municipal devel- 
opment traced, 6, 7, 

Estabrook, Capt. Joseph, 60. 

Everson, John, warned out, 37. 

Examples of warning out, see 
Warning out. 

Exeter, N.H., on inhabitancy, 88; 
practice of warning out in, 97, 
98. 

Fair (e) ban (c)k(e), Richard, 19, 20. 
Family history greatlj'^ aided by 

town records of warnings out 

and the statutes by which they 

were authorized, 117. 
Fees to town officers produced by 

the process of warning out. 111, 

112. 
Finch, Mrs. , of West Chester, 

87. 
First case: of support by town of 

Boston of person admitted, 24; 

of warning out in New England, 

23. 
First great poor law in England, 8. 



First Settlement Act, see Settle- 
ment Act. 

First warning out Act in New 
Hampshire (1718), 89; in Ver- 
mont (1787), 106, 107. 

First warning out law in Con- 
necticut (1673), 65; in Plym- 
outh Colony (1671), 59. 

First warning out statute in Mas- 
sachusetts (1692), 51. 

Fletcher, Timo., selectman of 
Alstead, N.H., 2. 

"Followers," meaning of, 6. 

Foote, Good", admitted, 85. 

Ford, Timothy, admitted, 29. 

Foreigners and inhabitancy in Con- 
necticut, 78. 

Foule, Thomas, admitted, 21. 

"Frankpledge," meaning of, 5, 6. 

Free fishing and fowling, right of, 10. 

Freedom of the community, see 
Inhabitancy. 

Fryar, Nat., bondsman, 24. 

Fundamental articles of agreement 
in Woodbury, Conn., 86. 

"Fundamentals," The, so called, 
of Connecticut, 63, 64. 

Funnell, Mrs. , 41, 42. 

Galloppe, John, 20. 

Garish, Nathaniel, selectman of 
Durham, Me., 104. 

Gates, Sir Thomas, and others, re- 
ceive patent for Colony of Vir- 
ginia, 16. 

General Court of the Massachusetts 
Colony, orders and laws of the, 
regarding inhabitancy and warn- 
ing out, 46-52. 

Generall Lawes & Liberties of the 
Province of New Hampshire 
(16i^) on the exclusion of 
strangers, 88. 

Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, 12, 14; 
receives patent from Queen Eliz- 
abeth, 15; takes possession of 
Newfoundland, 15. 

Gilbert, Jno., 24. 

Gilford, William, brikelayer, ad- 
mitted, 23. 

Gillam, Robert, marrj-ner, ad- 
mitted, 20. 

"Giving the freedom of the city," 
effective meaning of, 9. 



120 



Index 



Gleison, Thomas, warned out, 31, 

32. 
Gorges, Sir Ferdinando, 16. 
Gorhaiii, Me., warning out in, 102. 
Gornell, John, bondsman, 40. 
Gosnokl visits Massachusetts Bay 

(1(>02), 15. 
Governor and Company of the 

Massachusetts Bay in Newe- 

England, 17. 
Grants of land by towns, 18. 
Greene, Peter, 41. 

Greenefield, Mr. , 20. 

Greenfieh), Mass., warning out 

cases in, 62. 
Gregg, Hugh, selectman of Peter- 

boro, N.H., 96. 
Groton, Mass., inhabitancy and 

warning out in, 33. 
Guilford, Conn., decision on sale 

or purchase of land, 84. 
Gunn, Thomas, 86. 

Haddam, Conn., warning out in, 
84. 

Hadley, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 37. 

Hall, Isaac, 28. 

Harmon, Daniel, of Standish, 
warned out, 103. 

Hart, John, fined, 24. 

Hartford, Conn., orders as to re- 
ceiving or warning out new- 
comers, 83. 

Hartford, Vt., practice of warning 
out in. 111. 

Harvard, John, and others, ad- 
mitted as inhabitants in Charles- 
town, 29. 

Harwood, Thomas, bondsman, 23. 

Hatch, Ansal, selectman of Little- 
ton, N.H., 96. 

Haverhill, Mass., all new-comers 
warned out in, 60. 

Hayden, William, 86. 

Heard, Edmund, and family, 
warned out, 2, 3. 

Henniker, N.H., warning out in, 
96. 

Henry, Jolin, 56. 

Hickock, Nath'I, 85. 

Hims, ,widdow, warned out, 40. 

Hodge, Ann, caution entered 
against, 61. 



Holmes, Debora, refused admis- 
sion, 32. 
Holyoke, Elizur, bondsman, 28. 
House ownersliip very desirable for 

admission to inhabitancy, 22. 
Howes, Mr. , committeeman 

of Yarmouth, 44. 
Hoyden, James, admitted, 29. 
Hudson, Charles, statement as to 

warning out in Lexington, Mass., 

60-62. 
Hudson, William, fined, 20. 
Hull, Elizabeth, wife of Roberte 

Hull, 22. 
Hull, Richard, carpenter, 20. 
Hutchinson, Ralph, fined, 24. 
Hutchinson, Richard, warned out, 

61. 

Illustrations of warning out, see 
Warning out. 

Immigration into New England, 
a cause of the warning out 
practice, 121. 

Indian deeds and original land 
titles, 12, 13; wars (1675) and 
warning out, 50. 

Inhabitancj' : and warning out, 8; 
conditions of admission to, 18, 19; 
early colony and state laws, 46- 
55, 63-83, *88-95, 99-101, 104- 
110; historic basis of, 5; implies 
right to lands and commonage, 
10; legal, in England, 9; right 
and obligations of, in Boston, 
19-23; Connecticut, 63-87; 
Maine, 101-106; Massachusetts 
towns, outside of Boston, 26-37; 
New England, 4-19; New 
Hampshire, 88-98; Plymouth 
Colony, 37-46; Rhode Island, 
99-101; Vermont, 101-113. 

Inhabitants of other States than 
Connecticut, statutes concerning 
admission of, 78-82. 

Jackson, John, fined, 43. 

James I, gives Virginia patent 
(1602), 16; charter to "The 
Council established at Plymouth, 
in the County of Devon, for the 
Planting, Ruling, and Govern- 
ing of New England in America" 
(1620), 16. 



Index 



127 



Johnson, James, warned out, 103. 
Johnson, Peter, the Dutchman, 

20, 21. 
Jordan, Samuel and Jedediah, 

warned out, 103, 

Keniston, Mrs. , admitted, 32. 

Kettle, Richard, mentioned, 29. 

Kidder, Saml., constable of Al- 
stead, N.H., 1, 2. 

Knight, Elijah, selectman of Rock- 
ingham, Vt., 113. 

Lancaster, Mass., cases of warning 
out in 1791, 2, 3; forms of warn- 
ing out used in 1671, 5G; in- 
habitancy and warning out, 33. 

Land, restraint of alienation of, 
18, 19. 

Land ownership and inhabitancy 
in New England, 11. 

Land titles in New England, origin 
of, 10-17. 

Lane, Op'tunitie Lane, 43. 

Langham, Mary, 24. 

Length of time warning out was 
effective and practised, 114-116, 
120. 

Lewes, John, fined, 23. 

Lexington, Mass., warning out in, 60. 

Littleton, N.H., practice of warning 
out in, 95, 96. 

Long, Joseph, 40. 

Lyall, Francis, admitted, 20. 

Lynn, Mass., orders of warning 
out in, 59. 

Lyon, Fetter, 41. 

MacKentiah, Martha, of Reading, 
warned out, 58. 

Mackintosh, Archable, and family, 
warned out, 61. 

Mackreth, Reginald, from Liver- 
pool in Nova Scotia, warned 
out, 45. 

Mahoney, Mrs. , and child, 

warned out, 59. 

Mahoone, Derman, fined, 24, 25. 

Maine: and land titles, 14; Con- 
stitution of, October 29, 1819, 
104; Settlement Act (1821), 104, 
105, 115; town settlement, in- 
habitancy, relief of poor and 
warning out in, 101-106, 115. 



Man, Kezia, caution entered 
against, 60. 

Maps and charts, early, of Ameri- 
can coast, 14, 15. 

March, Abigail, Hannah, Prudence, 
and Sarah, children of Samuel 
and Tabatha March, 112. 

March, Samuel, wife and children, 
warned out, 112, 113. 

March, Tabatha, wife of Samuel 
March, 112, 113. 

Marcy, Moses, Esq., 60. 

Marshfield, Mass. (1664), on in- 
habitancy and warning out, 55. 

Marten, Thomas, warned out, 84. 

Mason, Captain John, 16; vested 
rights of, 14, 

Massachusetts: early colony and 
state laws regarding inhabitancy 
and warning out, 46-53; first 
warning out statute (1692), 51, 
114; Settlement Act (1793), 55, 
114; warning out cases in 1794, 
52, 53, 114. 

Massachusetts Bay charter granted 
by Charles I (1629), 17. 

Massachusetts Colony, right of 
voting in, 8, 9. 

Mawer, William, 20. 

Maxfild, Clement and John, 39. 

Maynard, John, and family, 
warned out, 2, 3. 

Medfield, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 34. 

Medford, Mass., custom of warn- 
ing out in, 57. 

Me(i)lton, Mass., mentioned, 40, 
41. 

MerrifeUd, Henery, 41, 42. 

Merrye, Water, 22. 

Middleboro, Mass., inhabitancy 
conditions in, 38. 

Miller, Simon, 86. 

Ministers, settlement of settled and 
ordained, in Maine Act of Settle- 
ment, 105; in Massachusetts 
Act, 53, 116, 117. 

Miontinomi, see Cononicus. 

Morgan, Quartus, selectman of 
Rockingham, Vt., 113. 

Morse, John, admitted, 29. 

Moses, John, 85, 86. 

Muddy River, 21; (Brookline) a 
"peculiar," 49, note *. 



128 



Index 



Municipalities' liability for prop- 
erty destroyed in riots, origin 
of, "9. 

Mylne feild, Boston, mentioned, 22. 

Naticke, Mass., Indians of, and 
sales of land, 13. 

Nowburv, Mass., warning out in, 
59. ' 

Newbury, Vt., practice of warning 
out new-comers, 111. 

New-comers to new towns, usually 
warned out as a caution, 4G-62, 
119, 120, and passim. 

New England: admission of in- 
habitants, 18; first record of 
warning out in, 23; origin of 
land titles in, 10-17; original 
dimensions of, 16; poor laws 
the outgrowth of the warning 
out statutes, 120; right and ob- 
ligations of inhabitancy, 4-9; 
right of exclusion from, exercised 
in the colonies, 10; settlers fol- 
low custom of English affairs, 
8; warning out, examples of 
and reasons for, 1-4, 8. 

Newfoundland, settlement at 
(1522), 15: taken possession 
of by Gilbert, 15. 

New France, 15. 

New Hampshire: first warning 
out Act (1718), 89; inhabitancy 
and warning out in, 88-98, 115; 
roval province of, and land titles, 
14'; Settlement x\ct (1796), 115. 

New Haven, Conn., admission to 
and inhabitancy in, 86, 87. 

New Plymouth, Colony of, see 
Plymouth Colony. 

Newport, R.I., order as to sale of 
land, etc., by General Court, 100. 

Newtowne, see Cambridge. 

Northampton, Mass. (1672), and 
land titles, 13. 

Norton, Francis, admitted, 29. 

Olcott, Elias, selectman of Rock- 
ingham, Vt., 2. 

Oliuer, Frances, warned out, 40. 

Osgood, Aaron, selectman of 
Durham, Me., 104. 

Oxford, Mass., warning out (1789 
foil.) in, 62. 



Painter, Thomas, 21. 

Palmer, John, carpenter, 22. 

Pane, Mr. , of Concord, 21. 

Parish, becomes the poor-law 
unit, 7, 8; original function of, 
6, 7: revival of importance of 
(1601), 8. 

Parker, Jonathan, Jr., constable of 
Rindge, N.H., 97. 

Parker, Richard, merchant, ad- 
mitted, 21. 

Patch, Samuel, 58. 

Pawtuxet River, R.I., 99. 

Peacepledge, meaning of, 5, 6. 

Pease, John, bondsman, 24. 

Peculiar, 49, 54; meaning of, 49, 
note *. 

Penobscot, Me., warning out 
in, 103. 

Pequot territory, 13. 

Perry, Arthure, 22. 

Peterboro, N.H., warning out in, 96. 

Pighogg, a Chururgeon, admitted, 
23. 

Pingree, Eben, selectman of Little- 
ton, N.H., 96. 

Pittman, Richard, first person 
warned out in New England 
(1656), 23. 

Plum, John, and Mercy Chub, his. 
daughter, 42. 

Plymouth Colony and town: and 
land grants, 14: charter granted 
by Charles I (1629), 17; early 
colony laws as to inhabitancy, 
53-55; first warning out law 
(1671), 54; franchise in, 8; 
inhabitancy conditions in, 37, 
38, 44. 

Poland, Margaret, widow, 58. 

Poor law in England, the first 
great (1601), 8. 

Poor laws in New England, origin 
of, 120. 

Poor relief in colonial New Eng- 
land, 118, 119; in mediaeval 
England, 7, 8. 

Pope, John, 41. 

Portsmouth, R.I., inhabitancy 
order of, 100. 

Proctor, Samuel, of Plymouth, 
wai'ned out, 103. 

"Proprietors" and grants of land, 
17. 



Index 



129 



Providence, R.I., compact for the 

establishment of, 99, 100. 
Province of New Hampshire, see 

New Hampshire. 
Prudential men = the selectmen, 48. 
Pryor, Daniel, of Tewksbury, warns 

himself out, 59. 
Pulsipher, Sam'l W., selectman 

of Rockingham, Vt., 2. 

Raleigh, Sir Walter, first to occupy 

Virginia, 15, 16. 
Rand, Goodman, admitted, 29. 
Rawlings, Richard, a plasterer, 

20. 
Read, Elijah, constable at Rock- 
ingham, Vt., 113. 

Reade, Esdras, taylor, 21. 

Reading, Mass. (1691), cases of 
warning out in, 57. 

Reasons for warning out sum- 
marized, 118. 

Restraint upon alienation of land, 
18, 19. 

Revolutionary War causes greater 
stringency as to warning out, 
56 foil., 62, 73, 94, 98, 101, 103, 
111. 

Rhode Island: and Indian land 
titles, 13; early colony and state 
laws as to inhabitancy and warn- 
ing out, 99-101; history of land 
titles in, 11, 12; inhabitancy, 
relief of poor, town settlement, 
etc., 99-101; warning out never 
authorized by statute, 115. 

Rice, Merrick, warned out, 3. 

Rindge, N.H., warning out in, 96. 

Rise, Isack, and Nehimia Rise, 85. 

Rix, , widow, refused inhabi- 
tancy, 86. 

Robbe, Alexr., selectman of Peter- 
boro, N.H., 96. 

Robbins, James, 61. 

Roberson, Daniel, warned out, 103. 

Robert, Earl of Warwick, 16, 17. 

Roberts, Henery, warned out, 41. 

Rockingham, Vt., warning out in, 
2, 112. 

Roff, Daniel, and family, warned 
out, 61. 

Rosewell, Sir Henry, charter mem- 
ber of the Massachusetts Bay 
Colony, 17. 



Ross, Hannah, caution entered 

against, 61. 
Rourk, Martin, town clerk of 

Durham, Me., 104. 
Rowley, Mass., inhabitancy and 

warning out in, 36. 
Roxburv, Mass., warning out in, 

38. ' 
Russian communities and restraint 

of alienation of lands, 18. 

Saco, Me., inhabitancy and warn- 
ing out in, 34, 35. 

Salem, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 32, 36; cases of 
warning out in 1679 and 1695, 56. 

Saltonstall, Sir Richard, charter 
member of the Massachusetts 
Bay Colony, 17. 

Sampson, Elizabeth, widow, of 
Harvard, Mass., 61. 

Sandwich, warning out in, 37. 

Sanford, Me., warning out in, 102. 

Sanfurd, Richard, 24. 

Saunders, Silvester, 22. 

Saunders, , a booke-bynder, 20. 

Scituate, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 26. 

Seaberry, John, a seaman, ad- 
mitted, 22. 

Seaborne, John, a taylor, admitted, 
21. 

Searle, Phillip, 41. 

Security, admission upon, 23, 87, 
and passim; bond of, ordinarily 
twenty pounds, 25. 

Settlement Act: in Connecticut 
(1796), 74-80, 115; and pro- 
visions of Act now in force, 82; 
Maine (1821), and its provisions 
differing from the Massachu- 
setts Act, 104, 105, 115; Massa- 
chusetts (1793), 52, 53, 55, 114; 
New Hampshire (1796), 115; 
Vermont, (1817), 113, 115. 
Seward, Richard, admitted, 24. 

Shepard, Amos, selectman of Al- 

stead, N.H., 2. 
Sherman, Philip, 20. 
Sled, John, and wife, warned out, 

84. 
Smith, Jeremiah, warned out, 103. 
Smith, Quince, 28. 
Smith, Ralph, admitted, 29. 



130 



Index 



Smith, Richard, admitted, 24. 

Snellen, , Dr., of Boston, 42. 

Snow, Johanna, cantion entered 
against, (50. 

Sowers, Roger, 23. 

Spencer, Jarrad, 83, 84. 

Spencer, Roger, 34, 35. 

Sprague, Hon. John, and family, 
warned out, 2, 3, 56. 

Springfield, Mass., admission to 
inhabitancy and entertainment 
of strangers under strict control, 
27, 28. 

Squakeage, village of, 13. 

Stackpole, John, warned out, 103. 

Stearns, Ezra S., historian, state- 
ment by, 97. 

Stedman, Jolm, bondsman, 84. 

Stedman, William, warned out, 3. 

Steuens, child of Mr. , of Bos- 
ton, 43. 

Stockbridge, Hannah, caution en- 
tered against, 61. 

Stone, Abigail, of ^Yoburn, 61. 

Storer, Richard, admitted, 22. 

Strangers: entertainment of stran- 
gers under strict control, 23-45 
and passim; laws of General 
Court of Massachusetts as to 
admission of, 46-63; to be re- 
ported to selectmen within 8 
days, 22, 23, and passim. 

Sturbridge, Mass., 60. 

Sudburv, Mass., warning out in, 
57, 58. 

Summary of reasons for warning 
out, 118-121. 

Sumner, William, 40. 

Surety, admission upon, see Se- 
curity, admission upon. 

Sutton, town of, 60. 



Teffe, William, taylor, 21. 
Templeton, James, constable of 

Peterboro, N.H., 96. 
Tewksbury, Mass., some queer 

cases of warning out in, 59. 
Thacher, Mr. , committeeman 

of Yarmouth, 44. 

Thomas, Captain , 86. 

Thomaston, Me., warning out in, 

102. 
Tilston, Timothy, bondsman, 41. 



Tilstone, , constable at Plym- 
outh, 41. 

Tinge, Mr. , 20. 

Tingle, Paletiah, warned out, 102. 

Tithings, meaning and significance 
of Old English, 6. 

Torrey, Ebenezer, and family, 
warned out, 2, 3. 

Town, as defined by Blackstone, 
Coke, and others, 7. 

Town vote avoids effect of warning 
out, 116. 

Towns, right of, to warn out recog- 
nized by the Articles of Confed- 
eration '(1672), 49. 

Townsman and inhabitant, inter- 
changeable terms, 21. 

Tubbs, Zebulen, his wife Esther, 
and children, 56. 

Turner, Ezekiel, of Freeport, 
warned out, 103. 

Turner, , admitted, 29. 

Tuttell, Richard, 21. 

Underwood, Beulah, Junior Israel, 

Samuel, warned out, 95, 96. 
Union, Me., warning out in, 102. 

Value of warning out records, 117, 
118. 

Vermont: early colony and state 
laws as to inhabitancy and warn- 
ing out, 106-110; first warning 
out Act in (1787), 106, 107; 
Settlement Act (1817), 111, 113, 
115; town settlement, inhabi- 
tancy, relief of poor, and warning 
out, "106-113. 

Vining, Benjamin, constable at 
Durham, Me., 103, 104. 

Virginia, early history of colonial, 
15, 16. 

Voting privilege in Massachusetts 
Colony, 8, 9. 

Waite, Abigail, warned out, 45. 
Wales, Joseph, warned out, 3. 
Wallingford, Conn., order as to 

admission, sales, etc., 84, 85. 
Walpole, N.H., warning out in, 98. 
Warning out: avoidance of effect 

of, by town vote, 116, 117; fees 



Index 



131 



to town officers for, 111, 112; 
first record of, in New England, 
23; historic basis of, 5; Indian 
wars and, 50; length of time 
of effectiveness of, 114-116, 
120; never authorized by statute 
in Rhode Island, 115, IIG; not 
provided by statute in State of 
Maine, 104, 105; notices of 
great importance for family and 
town histoiy, 117, 118; reasons 
for, summarized, 118-121; Rev- 
olutionary War and, 56 foil., 62, 
73, 94, 98, 101, 103, 111; right 
of towns to, recognized by Arti- 
cles of Confederation, 49; Settle- 
ment Acts as to, 52, 53, 55, 74- 
86, 104, 105, 113-115; value of 
records of, 117, 118; wording 
of the returns of the warrants 
of, not uniform, 60. 

Warning out in, Boston, 19-26; 
Connecticut, 63-87; Maine, 
101-106; Massachusetts, 26-53; 
New England, 1-17; New Hamp- 
shire, 88-98; Plymouth, 44-62; 
Rhode Island, 99-101; Teu- 
tonic townships, 5; Vermont, 
106-113. 

Warrants of warning out, wording 
of the returns of the, not uni- 
form, 60. 

Warwick, Robert, Earl of, 16, 17. 

Watters, Good", fined, 23. 

Watertown, Mass., inhabitancy 
and warning out in, 33. 

Way, Aron, 24. 

Way, Richard, admitted, 24. 

Wealth, average of, prior to 1800, 
120, 121. 



Web, Jno., ensigne, 24. 

Weeks, Joseph, 43. 

Wenbourne, William, 23. 

Wenham, Mass., warning out in, 
58. 

W^ey mouth, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 34. 

Wheelwright and the Antinomians 
proceeded against, 47, 48. 

Whipping in public, a punishment 
for disobeying notice of warning 
out, 66, 69-72, 76, 95 and passim; 
repealed in Connecticut, 80, 81. 

Whittemore, Abigail, widow, 61. 

Whittemore, Nathaniel, 61. 

William, Viscount Say and Seal, 17. 

Williams, Roger, 13, 99. 

Williams, Tho^, town clerk of 
Deerfield, Mass., 56. 

Willson, Mr. Jno., senr., 24. 

Wilson, Jacob, 21. 

Windsor, Conn., 85. 

Winthrop, John, first governor of 
Massachusetts, mentioned, 19. 

Winthrop, John, the younger, sur- 
geon at New Haven, Conn., and 
governor of the colony, 87. 

Woburn, Mass., inhabitancy and 
warning out in, 26. 

Wood, David, selectman of Rock- 
ingham, Vt., 113. 

Wood, John, fined, 28. 

Wo(o)dard, Nathaneell, admitted, 
23. 

Woodbury, Conn., fundamental 
articles of agreement, 86. 

Worcester County, Mass., returns 
of warning out from the different 
towns of, 59, 60. 

Wright, Richard, fined, 21. 



One copy del. to Cat. Div. 
^f^' 29 I J/ 1 



